If You Wake at Midnight

July, 12, 2022 | 7 Comments


  1. So began a journey towards the truth, a truth that vested interests in the United Kingdom and around the globe were determined to conceal.

    In a unique exposé of an entirely preventable pharmaceutical disaster, Marriott turns a spotlight on the murky world of clandestine military and industrial research in the United States in which Lariam was developed. With other survivors, including some very courageous women, he undertakes a forensic examination of a scandal extending to the upper echelons of government and the armed forces. A culture of betrayal and dishonour had imperilled those defending our country to the most insidious and silent form of friendly fire.

    This is the book Johnny Mercer could have written.

    UK Surgeon General Defends Use Of Lariam

    The British military’s Surgeon General has defended the use of anti-malarial drug Lariam, despite evidence of serious side-effects among…


    Can I say…
    Can I just say…
    Can I say…

    (sign up to watch this video, you can unsign later)

    Doxycycline https://rxisk.org/rxisk-says-doxycycline-causes-suicide/

    Can I say

    An MHRA spokesperson said it had been granted an extension to the deadline for replying to the coroner’s demand for action “in order to seek independent expert advice.” The spokesperson added, “We are currently reviewing the available evidence on the suspected association between doxycycline and psychotic disorder.


    Can I say

    louis appleby

    New @NICECommsdepression guideline warns about suicidal feelings or agitation at start of antidepressant treatment. Patients & their families should be alerted to this.

    Bereaved families have had a vital influence on this guideline. #SuicidePrevention

    Can I just say

    Louis Appleby had every opportunity to put this in his presentation at RCP Conference but failed to do so

    ‘spotted flycatchers & spotless starlings, vultures, lizards, bats, tortoises & hummingbird hawk moths.’


    Can I say

    ‘caricatures of science that have killed and maimed tens of thousands of people.’

    If you Wake at Midnight…friendly fire…

  2. Does it boost anybody’s confidence in trust, transparency, integrity ,blah blah

    Covid-19: Researchers face wait for patient level data from Pfizer and Moderna vaccine trials
    BMJ 2022; 378 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o1731 (Published 12 July 2022)

    Jennifer Block
    Author affiliations
    Independent researchers looking to obtain patient level data from the Pfizer and Moderna covid-19 vaccine trials may have to wait longer. In status reports filed recently with the US federal trials registry (clinicaltrials.gov) between February and May, both companies extended the dates by which the trials will be completed, Pfizer by nine months, from 15 May 2023 to 8 February 2024. Moderna’s expected completion date is delayed from 27 October to 29 December 2022.

    Pfizer indicated in its trial protocol that individual participant data would be made available two years after study completion.1 Now that the date has been pushed back, Pfizer will entertain and review requests “when the study is complete and all planned analyses have been performed,” said the company’s senior director of global media relations, Jerica Pitts.

    Luis Carlos Saiz, a researcher at the Innovation and Organisation Unit of the Navarre Regional Health Service, Spain, said that access to raw patient data was important for researchers because “it is key to build trust in health policies and to protect citizens from potential vested interests.”

    The raw patient data would allow independent researchers to assess trials and verify results. “The vaccination strategies adopted by health authorities all over the world must be audited and checked by looking carefully at the raw data,” said Saiz, especially given the “revelations of poor practices” at vaccine trial sites as reported by The BMJ.2

    Pitts explained by email that the completion date needed to be changed because of a single study participant “who received their second vaccination very late,” in the spring of 2022. “Given that the timing of downstream visits are dependent upon completion of the initial two doses, this pushed the overall primary completion date for the study out,” Pitts wrote. The total enrolment is 44 000 participants.3

    Reformulating booster shots
    In June the US Food and Drug Administration’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee recommended that manufacturers reformulate booster shots to target omicron variants as well as the original strain.

    Dick Bijl, president of the International Society of Drug Bulletins, is among the researchers who cite uncertainties about whether the products will be effective enough to warrant additional doses and whether the benefit will outweigh the risk of potential side effects—and how that risk-benefit ratio will differ among subgroups. “The main problem is that we need all the data,” he said. “The public needs transparent, open study details so they can judge for themselves whether they want to vaccinate or not.”

    Bijl cited a recent preprint study that examined the first four months of Pfizer and Moderna trial data—the same dataset that was the basis for FDA emergency use authorisation—and found an excess risk of serious adverse events of 12.5 per 10 000.4 The authors pointed to the need for more formal analysis: “Individual participant data for all serious adverse events is not publicly available at present, but would help identify factors (e.g. age and comorbidities) that may elevate the risk.”

    Bijl and Saiz are among hundreds of physicians and researchers who’ve joined the non-profit organisation Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency, which is suing the FDA to make Pfizer’s covid-19 vaccine biological product file data public and has already prompted some data to be released through the Freedom of Information Act, which the organisation is publishing on its website.5

    Over the past decade researchers have pushed regulators successfully for more data transparency, achieving policy victories within the European Medicines Agency and Health Canada. In a May 2020 letter, researchers from the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care and Cochrane urged the EMA to publish detailed clinical study reports on all covid-19 drugs and vaccines in spite of accelerated authorisation,6 which they have done. But neither the EMA nor Health Canada holds participant level datasets; only the FDA and the sponsors do. “To assess these products further and to accelerate the development of additional products, the fast and full public availability of the information submitted to regulators is of utmost importance. Transparency is also vital to maintain public trust during the crisis,” said the letter.

  3. children’s union

    # Topics
    CCVAC, COVID-19, Informed consent, PutChildrenFirst
    Letter to UK health authorities, re: 6 month to 4 years Covid vaccines
    Letter to UK health authorities, re: 6 month to 4 years Covid vaccines
    Dr June Raine, CEO MHRA
    Professor Lim Wei Shen, Chairman JCVI COVID-19 vaccines sub-committee
    Professor Chris Whitty, Chief Medical Officer
    Dr Jenny Harries, CEO, UKHSA
    Hon.Sajid Javid, MP, Secretary of State for Health & Social Care

    30th June 2022

    Dear Dr Raine,

    Re: Covid-19 vaccines for 6 months to 4 years age group

    We are writing to you urgently concerning the announcement that the FDA has granted an Emergency Use Authorisation for both Pfizer and Moderna Covid-19 vaccines in preschool children.

    We would urge you to consider very carefully the move to vaccinate ever younger and younger children against SARS-CoV-2, despite the gradual but significant reducing virulence of successive variants, the increasing evidence of rapidly waning vaccine efficacy, the increasing concerns over long-term vaccine harms, and the knowledge that the vast majority of this young age group have already been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 repeatedly and have demonstrably effective immunity. Thus, the balance of benefit and risk which supported the rollout of mRNA vaccines to the elderly and vulnerable in 2021, is totally inappropriate for small children in 2022.

    We also strongly challenge the addition of Covid-19 vaccination into the routine child immunisation programme,[i]despite no demonstrated clinical need, known and unknown risks (see below) and the fact that these vaccines still have only conditional marketing authorisation.

    It is noteworthy that the Pfizer documentation[ii] presented to the FDA has huge gaps in the evidence provided:

    The protocol was changed mid-trial. The original 2-dose schedule exhibited poor immunogenicity with efficacy far below the required standard. A third dose was added by which time many of the original placebo recipients had been vaccinated.
    There was no statistically significant difference between the placebo and vaccinated groups in either the 6–23-month age group or the 2-4-year-olds even after the third dose. Astonishingly the results were based on just three participants in the younger age group (1 vaccinated and 2 placebo) and just seven participants in the older 2–4-year-olds (2 vaccinated and 5 placebo). Indeed, for the younger age the confidence intervals ranged from minus 367% to plus 99%. The manufacturer stated that the numbers were too low to draw any confident conclusions. Moreover, these limited numbers come only from children infected more than 7 days after the third dose.
    Over the whole time period from the first dose onwards (see page 39 Tables 19 & 20), there were a total of 225 infected children in the vaccinated arm and 150 in the placebo arm, giving a calculated vaccine efficacy of only 25% (14% for the 6-23 months, and 33% for 2-4s).
    The additional immunogenicity studies against Omicron, requested by the FDA, only involved a total of 66 children tested one month after the third dose (see page 35).
    It is incomprehensible that the FDA considered that this represents sufficient evidence on which to base a decision to vaccinate healthy children. When it comes to safety, the data is even thinner: only 1057 children, some already unblinded, were followed for just 2 months. It is noteworthy that Sweden and Norway are not recommending the vaccine for 5-11s and Holland is not recommending it for children who have already had Covid-19. The director of the Danish Health and Medicines Authority stated recently that with what is now known, the decision to vaccinate children was a mistake.[iii]

    We summarise below the overwhelming arguments against this vaccination.

    A. Extremely low risk from Covid-19 to young children

    In the whole of 2020 and 2021, not a single child aged 1-9 died where Covid-19 was the sole diagnosis on the death certificate, according to ONS data.[iv]
    A detailed study in England from 1st March 2020 to 1st March 2021 found only 6 children under 18 years died with no comorbidities. There were no deaths aged 1-4 years.[v]
    Children clear the virus more easily than adults.[vi]
    Children mount effective, robust, and sustained immune responses.[vii]
    Since the arrival of the Omicron variant, infections have been generally much milder. That is also true for unvaccinated under 5s.[viii]
    By June 2022 it is now estimated that 89% of 1-4-year-olds had already had SARS-CoV-2 infection.[ix]
    Recent data from Israel shows excellent long-lasting immunity following infection in children, especially in 5-11s.[x]
    B. Poor vaccine efficacy

    In adults it has become apparent that vaccine efficacy wanes steadily over time, necessitating boosters at regular intervals. Specifically, vaccine efficacy has waned more rapidly against the latest Omicron variants.
    In children vaccine efficacy has waned more rapidly in 5-11s than in 12-17s, possibly related to the lower dose used in the paediatric formulation. One study from New York showed efficacy against Omicron falling to only 12% by 4-5 weeks and to negative values by 5-6 weeks post second dose.[xi]
    In the Pfizer 0-4s trial,1 the efficacy after two doses fell to negative values, necessitating a change to the trial protocol. After a third dose there was a suggestion of efficacy from 7-30 days but there is no data beyond 30 days to see how quickly this will wane.
    C. Potential harms of Covid-19 vaccines for children

    There has been great concern about myocarditis in adolescents and young adults, especially in males after the second dose, estimated at 1/2600 in active post marketing surveillance in Hong Kong.[xii] The emerging evidence of persistent cardiac abnormalities[xiii] in adolescents with post mRNA vaccine myopericarditis, as demonstrated by cardiac MRI at 3-8 months follow up, suggests this is far from ‘mild and shot-lived’. The potential for longer term effects requires further study and calls for the strictest application of the precautionary principle in respect of the youngest and most vulnerable children.
    Although post-vaccination myocarditis appears to be less common in 5-11-year-olds than older children, it is, none-the-less, increased over baseline.[xiv]
    In the Pfizer study 50% of vaccinated children had systemic adverse events, including irritability and fever. Diagnosis of myocarditis is much more difficult in younger children.[xv] No troponin levels or ECG studies were documented. Even a vaccinated child in the trial, hospitalised with fever, calf pain and a raised CPK, had no report of D-dimers, antiplatelet antibodies or troponin levels.
    In Pfizer’s 5-11s post-authorisation conditions, they are required to conduct studies looking for myocarditis and are not due to report results until 2027.
    Of equal concern are, as yet unknown, negative effects on the immune system. In the 0-4s trial, only 7 children were described as having ‘severe’ Covid-19 – 6 vaccinated and 1 given placebo. Similarly, for the 12 children with recurrent episodes of infection, 10 were vaccinated against only 2 who received placebo. These are all tiny figures and much too small to rule out any adverse impact such as antibody dependant enhancement (ADE)[xvi] and other impacts on the immune system.
    Also unanswered is the question of Original Antigenic Sin.[xvii] It is of note that in a large Israeli study, those infected after vaccination had poorer cover than those vaccinated after infection.[xviii] In the Moderna trial, N antibodies were seen in only 40% of those infected after vaccination, compared to 93% of those infected after placebo.[xix]
    There is evidence of vaccine-induced disruption of both innate and adaptive[xx],[xxi] immune responses. The possibility of developing an impaired immune function would be disastrous for children, who have the most competent innate immunity, which by now has been effectively trained by the circulating virus.
    Totally unknown is whether there will be any adverse effect on T-cell function leading to an increase in cancers.[xxii]
    Also, in terms of reproductive function, limited animal biodistribution studies showed lipid nanoparticles concentrate in ovaries and testes.[xxiii] Adult sperm donors have showed a reduction in sperm counts particularly of motile sperm, falling by 3 months post-vaccination and remaining depressed at 4-5 months.[xxiv]
    Even for adults, concerns are rising that serious adverse events are in excess of hospitalisations from Covid-19.[xxv]
    D. Informed consent

    For 5-11s, the JCVI, in recommending a ‘non-urgent offer’ of vaccination, specifically noted the importance of fully informed consent with no coercion.[xxvi]
    With the low uptake in this age group, the presence of ‘therapy dogs’,[xxvii] advertisements including superhero images[xxviii] and information about child vaccination protecting friends and family, all clearly run contrary to the concept of consent, fully informed and freely given.[xxix]
    The complete omission of information explaining to the public the different and novel technology used in Covid-19 vaccines compared to standard vaccines, and the failure to inform of the lack of any long-term safety data, borders on misinformation.[xxx]
    E. Effect on public confidence

    Vaccines against much more serious diseases, such as polio and measles, need to be prioritised.[xxxi] Pushing an unnecessary and novel, gene-based vaccine onto young children risks seriously undermining parental confidence in the whole immunisation programme.
    The poor quality of the data presented by Pfizer risks bringing the pharmaceutical industry into disrepute and the regulators if this product is authorised.
    In summary, young healthy children are at minimal risk from Covid-19, especially since the arrival of the Omicron variant. Most have been repeatedly exposed to SARS-CoV-2 virus, yet have remained well, or have had short, mild illness. As detailed above, the vaccines are of brief efficacy, have known short- to medium-term risks and unknown long-term safety. Data for clinically useful efficacy in small children are scant or absent. In older children, for whom they are already licensed, they have been promoted via ethically dubious schemes to the potential detriment of other, and vital, parts of the childhood vaccination programme.

    For a tiny minority of children for whom the potential for benefit clearly and unequivocally outweighed the potential for harm, vaccination could have been facilitated by restrictive licences. Whether following the precautionary principle or the instruction to First Do No Harm, such vaccines have no place in a routine childhood immunisation programme.

    There is a long list of those who have signed this on the web site

  4. “Too Big to Nail”

    Edward Dowd

    Watch this blast from the past. Send this to those who worship the vaccine.


    “Too Big To Nail” is about the criminal activity that has been covered up by the US government. 

    Deaths After Vaccination in Pfizer Trial Not Fully Investigated, New Documents Reveal

    13 JULY 2022 5:18 PM


    The revelations come in a report from Pfizer released on July 1st by court order as part of the documents which the U.S. FDA relied on to grant emergency use authorisation for the Pfizer vaccine in December 2020. They add to worries that adverse effects of the vaccine in the clinical trials were not properly documented, giving a potentially misleading picture of the drug’s safety.

    These reports add to the accumulating evidence that adverse events in the trials were not fully or properly investigated and recorded, giving a potentially misleading picture of the vaccines’ safety. Such evidence includes the disturbing stories of Maddie de Garay, a 12 year-old girl who was left nearly blind and suffering daily seizures shortly after receiving the vaccine during the Pfizer trial, an injury which Pfizer recorded as unrelated “abdominal pain”, and Augusto Roux, who was hospitalised with heart inflammation which the hospital doctor wrote was an adverse reaction to the vaccine but which was recorded by Pfizer as unrelated “bilateral pneumonia”. In addition, Danish investigators have found that more people died in the vaccine arms of the mRNA trials than in the control arms. The need for proper investigation by the medical authorities into the safety of the Covid vaccines remains as urgent as ever.

    “Too Big to Nail” – “it was like having an imaginary friend, a bad guy…”

  5. Edward DowdReposted

    Replying to @edwarddowd


    Mark is joined by the vaccine injured and bereaved

    with Dan Wootton and Neil Oliver and Sir Christopher Chope MP OBE and Vikki Spit (first victim payment) and Michelle Dewberry


    “You guys are frosted out”…

  6. The covid discussion can rage on but the above blog is about the book ‘If you wake at Midnight’ and the evils of Lariam (Mefloquine). Mefloquine is one of several anti-malarials based on quinoline, which itself is a parent of the original quinolone antibiotics. These days we are probably more familiar with the name fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin, Levaquin, Avelox/moxifloxacin and Ofloxacin) and hopefully have them all down as likely to cause serious and long lasting or permanent ADRs.

    What many people, HCPs and innocent patients alike, don’t expect is to see serious psychiatric ADRs from fluoroquinolones. Unfortunately these are often overlooked and the common side effect of insomnia is dismissed while the anxiety and panic attacks are often dealt with by gaslighting. Occasionally I’m contacted by (or about) someone who experiences no physical problems from a fluoroquinlone but has suddenly become preoccupied with the idea of jumping off a cliff. Because these effects are played down (practically smothered) by MHRA*, doctors rarely see them as being caused by an antibiotic while the psyche docs also dismiss this as a possible cause and can’t wait to get their prescription pads out.

    I wrote a blog about all this at: https://rxisk.org/cipro-will-do-the-trick-fda-fad-and-you/
    so, going back to their origins and Lariam, the linked BBC news article from 2016 is very relevant as it describes how the Army Chief (Lord Dannatt) refused Lariam after he saw how severely his son was affected:
    It points out that:
    The MoD’s doctors prescribed Lariam to more than 17,000 troops between April 2007 and March 2015, although it is not the main anti-malaria drug used by the armed forces.

    Lord Dannatt said the drug’s side-effects – which can include depression and suicidal thoughts – could be “pretty catastrophic”.

    He said: “Because [my son experienced] that effect, whenever I’ve needed anti-malarial drugs, I’ve said, ‘I’ll take anything, but I’m not taking Lariam.'”

    He added he was happy to “say sorry” to the troops. Well, this is more than anyone will ever get from MHRA so perhaps the troops still struggling even now should be grateful.

    * June Raine, CEO of MHRA, said at an open board meeting last year that “there’s no need to over-emphasise the risks”. The discussion was about the very well known risks of Oxycontin. I’ve also heard her say the same in discussions about Isotretinoin so I’m happy to assume not over-emphasising risk is standard practice in their office.

  7. The Fever Trail: 2001…

    Lariam: The malaria drug’s shocking psychological side effects

    While Lariam has been proven to be one of the most proficient medications in halting malaria infections, its side effects have earned it more criticism than praise.


    In 2002, four American soldiers were accused of murdering their wives. Two of the accused committed suicide shortly thereafter. And while the brutal crimes may have been attributed to post-traumatic stress resulting from combat, the accused pointed to psychotic episodes as a result of the use of Larium.

    According to a CBS report at the time, the Fort Bragg murders brought Larium’s side effects under the microscope. Following the incident, other soldiers and their wives began speaking out on the side effects of Larium. Despite medical reports detailing the prolonged harmful effects of Larium, the US government denied the correlation between the drug’s use and the Fort Bragg murders.

    More recently, Irish soldiers administered Larium during overseas deployment returned home suffering from fierce neuropsychiatric disorders. These soldiers, who were duty-bound to use the drug, have now launched legal proceedings against the Minister for Defence in May 2018.

    According to the law firm representing the complainants, 75 soldiers have laid legal complaints against the government for administering Larium. As reported by The Independent, the soldiers are being represented by solicitor Norman Spicer, a former Defence Forces member, who also experienced the adverse effects of Larium while deployed in Chad. Spicer explained:

    “I believe it [Larium] to have been administered in such a way that falls below standards which one might expect to receive. A lot of the soldiers I have been speaking to have suffered very badly.”

    A former female Defence Forces member taking legal action reported that, following the use of Larium, he suffered from suicidal thoughts, had to seek psychiatric treatment and now has difficulty securing and maintaining full-time employment.


    ‘It’s not a benign drug – it has ruined my life’

    Thousands take the anti-malarial drug Lariam every year, most without any problems. But some claim it causes serious side effects, ranging from depression to suicidal – or even homicidal – impulses. So should it be banned? Mark Honigsbaum investigates

    Mark Honigsbaum

    Thu 24 Oct 2002

    Roche accused them of “hype and hysteria”


     Indeed, they claim that if Hoffmann-LaRoche had taken their concerns about the severe psychiatric side effects associated with its anti-malaria medication, Lariam, more seriously seven years ago, Brunt might now be enjoying a brilliant career at Cambridge.

    As John O’Callaghan, a 29-year-old Australian who became mentally ill after taking Lariam during a surfing trip to Indonesia, wrote in a suicide note two years ago: “Since [Lariam] first blew my brains apart… I have never been the same, always dazed and confused, always physically sick. I never thought this could happen to me. Sorry mum, dad.”

     Mark Honigsbaum is the author of The Fever Trail: In Search of the Cure for Malaria (Macmillan); the paperback will be published on November 8. For further information, email: LariamInfo@earthlink.net.


     Instead they battle on in laboratories and facilities desperate to find what has eluded mankind for centuries. A cure.

Leave a Reply