Should I write to my MP about this?

[BeGladTealDog]

So after watching this, not only am I aghast, but am I being reasonable to write to my MP to request why this information being kept secret. If there is nothing to hide then why not just publish the data? Reasonable or unreasonable?

Don’t plan on watching a YouTube clip with no context so OP care to share what you are so upset about?

Regardless, I use

https://www.writetothem.com/

(a lot).

Many are claiming that the Covid vaccines have harmed them or their loved ones. Our government are claiming that they are 'safe and effective'.

UKHSA has confirmed that they do hold all of the data which would settle the matter once and for all, and allow the safety of the vaccines to be vindicated in relation to excess deaths (or not as the case may be).

But despite many FOI requests for the data to be released into the public domain, UKHSA are still refusing to release it because they say releasing the data would lead to the “distress” of bereaved relatives (if a link was discovered).

You can but they won’t listen. Love Dr John Campbell though! Been following him since 2020.

Many are claiming that the Covid vaccines have harmed them or their loved ones. Our government are claiming that they are 'safe and effective'.

Both can be true.

He pushes misinformation about the vaccines, he's not a medical doctor, and claimed ivermectin could be used to treat covid.

He's not a reliable source of information

What exactly does that have to do with the UKHSA freedom of information request being discussed?

This.

All vaccines carry risk, the illness carries greater risk. Its about statistics.

Because he pushes an antivax position. He's anti-science and untrustworthy

Loads of information here. I haven't bothered to read in detail.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting

Careful. Understanding science is akin to witchcraft in some places.

When you think of the millions upon millions of covid vaccinations world wide there are sure to be some serious side effects and from early on we were warned about them, hence no routine vaccination of children where the risk wasn't thought worth it as children only got a mild form (usually). And when you saw the numbers dying from covid before the vaccines, it was worth the risk for many people particularly for the elderly and other at high risk groups.

The main issue with vaccines is that (some) individuals only think in the world in terms of themselves (there is a joke about poor vision because of eye strain, if you like).

They completely and utterly ignore the fact that when you get a vaccination you aren't just doing it for you. You are doing it for the rest of society as well. The two are inseparable.

Like in GCSE history, I believe the PP is commenting on the reliability of the source (I have no opinions on this person myself, not had time to)

There was a significant uptick in excess deaths AFTER the Covid vaccines were rolled out. This is correlation, but does not reliably establish causation. Surely if the vaccine was 'safe and effective' then the opposite should have happened, and excess deaths should have dropped?

All the OP is doing is highlighting that the UKHSA has been asked for the data that shows all cause mortality in the vaccinated v's unvaccinated groups. This data would show whether correlation is likely to = causation (or not).

The UKHSA has refused on multiple occasions to be transparent with the data, yet has released the data to the vaccine companies.

Since the public data release could be an opportunity to silence the 'conspiracy' lot once and for all, I wonder why they still choose not to release the data. Could it be that the data contains information that is inconvenient to the powers that be?

There was a significant uptick in excess deaths AFTER the Covid vaccines were rolled out.

We still can't say if COVID opened the door for other diseases or viruses to take hold. We may never know. However there are loads and loads of nasties that can infect, clear up, and then re-emerge decades later to cause havoc.

None of which is a reason to dodge a vaccine that is intended to help us all.

From what I know about him, he was very pro-vaccine and promoted the shots until he himself experienced an adverse event.

What does anti-science mean? Do you think he is anti-science because he does not agree with the consensus? Surely the whole point of science is to challenge the established consensus and limits of known knowledge, and the status quo? After all, this is how science progresses is it not?

I remember from my science at school that Galileo was ridiculed because he believed that the earth went round the sun and not the other way round. No doubt at the time he was called an 'anti-science conspiracy loon' by people with vested interests, or by those who simply didn't know any better.

Then if your theory is correct, then why would UKHSA refuse to be transparent with the data?

And there are a long line of pharmaceutical products that were intended to help us all, but then proved at a later date to be very, very dangerous. Thalidomide and Vioxx are two examples (from many) that spring to mind.

Oh, I have no idea, nor any dogs in the fight. The OP asked if they should write to your MP (not that you need permission, for now) and I suggested a way to do it in stead of saying "Yes".

Beyond that ... well it's all moot. Apart from saying there is very little point in demanding some sort of data if you either can't understand it, or refuse to accept it. (Which I am not suggesting is the case with anyone in this thread).

Just because information is interesting to the public, it doesn't make it in the public interest to release it.

But by all means, stop frothing and request the info yourself. If you don't like the answer then complain to the ICO.

There. Solved your problem. Come back and update us.

Yes write to them.

I haven’t seen the video but presumably the data is robust and evidence based so of course the government should put it in the public domain. If they don’t want to make it available I can only assume they are hiding something.

Asking for evidence is not anti science. Hiding data is unethical.

Why would releasing information about the safety and efficacy (or not) of the vaccines that the public have taken en-mass, ever not be in the interests of the public?

Data enables informed choice to be made. That's a positive IMO, not a negative. I can't fathom why a public agency would wish to withhold this information from the public, so that informed consent then becomes impossible.

Given that the vaccines do nothing to prevent C-19 transmission, how on earth does me having a vaccine protect someone else?

Exactly.