How could this be ‘Blue Monday’?!  It is ‘Winnie the Pooh Day’!!  A.A. Milne was born on this day -18th January – 1882, his most famous character, first appearing on the printed page in 1926 – year before Pop was born!  The world would have been so much poorer without either of them …

The things that make me different are the things that make me.’

Winnie the Pooh.

Exactly.  I wonder, then, what that little bear would make of the world today – and the apathy of so many?

‘The truth about the CV19 vaccine – Dr Simone Gold’ .

A friend of mine, whom I respect greatly for having her own mind, put the above video on her Facebook page, yesterday.  The owner of her own business, she has put her own, wonderful stamp on that, too!  Many of her customers have become friends, people she cares about and whose lives have been made so much better for her kindness; that extra mile.  However, Elie has grown weary, run out of steam as, increasingly, she has been battered by the hysteria and complaints which are, now, characteristic of this pandemic.  People are scared and have been encouraged to ‘police’ thus, regardless of ensuring all sensible safety measures are in place, Elie has been forced to, repeatedly, make a stand for freedom of choice; the right of the individual; the right to choose.  It would seem, however, that that human right is a casualty of the media rhetoric; the relentless media scaremongering.  It would seem that most would prefer to eat grass – quietly!

Two people, other than myself, have liked the above video on Elie’s page.  Has anybody watched it?  I could, actually, liken it to the Michael Jackson documentary I made reference to on Friday: Leaving Neverland.  Why?  For the very reason – desperate to start this sentence with ‘because’ but just cannot! – that both have the same effect: neither can be ignored and, in the end, the truth is there for the taking.

Please click on the link and watch the video.  Almost an hour long, do not be put off.  What Dr Simone Gold has to say is, in no way, belittling the virus.  In no way, is she delivering anti-vaccine propaganda.  She is, merely, presenting information to those of a questioning mind.  A questioning mind.  Whatever happened to that faculty?  Blanket acceptance?  Is that an acceptable alternative?

Perhaps the three most important points I gleaned from this video were that the vaccine should be preceded by the adjective ‘experimental’; those receiving it are to be monitored for the next two years and there is no conclusive evidence to discount infertility as a side effect.

Fake news?  Mis-information?  Which part?  The vaccine is experimental.  It may be that it is a conglomeration of known elements but this particular combination has produced a new vaccine, the short-term existence of which, quite obviously, prohibits the knowledge of any long-term side-effects.  Vaccinated at 25 or 30, a young female may not choose to have children for many years to come only, then, to discover she is infertile …

Track and trace.  Those vaccinated are to be monitored for the next two years.  Personally, I haven’t heard of any such need in the case of any other vaccine.  Why is that?  Surely, rhetorical?  Undeniably fast-tracked, the next two years’ monitoring amounts to a clinical trial during which any side-effects will come to light.

The possibility that infertility could be a long-term side-effect.  Dr Gold discusses this on the video.  Something to do with the placenta – I did not make notes – rather than trawl back through the footage, I decided to google this point.  The first link which came up took me to  There, the following claim is addressed, dated 22 December 2020: ‘The Pfizer vaccine contains syncitin-1 which is vital for the formation of human placenta, so could lead to infertility’.  Next to that is ‘Our Verdict: The vaccine contains instructions on how to build a spike protein, a very small part of which resembles syncitin-1.  Realistically, there is very little chance the vaccine would cause the body to attack syncitin or cause infertility’.    

Three words: ‘very little chance’.

I watched a segment on This Morning today – well, yesterday, as I, now, write but today in terms of the date of this post! – primarily, addressing questions about the vaccine.  The chosen scientist was Professor Beate Rampmann, Director of Vaccine Centre at LSHTM (London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine).  I was, particularly, interested in the use of certain key words …

Introducing the item, Phillip Schofield referred to people who believe ‘fake news’ as being ‘sheep-like’.  Firstly, how does one classify ‘fake news’?  Who has the right to label someone else’s opinion, or information, as ‘fake news’?  That aside, am I alone in seeing the irony in his use of the term, ‘sheep-like’?  He may be happy to accept information without question but isn’t that the definition of ‘sheep-like’? 

Let me, now, detail some of the questions from viewers and Professor Rampmann’s subsequent answers …  A 25-year-old female sought reassurance as to her fertility, down the line, following the vaccine.  The definitive quote I wrote down, courtesy of Professor Rampmann, was, ‘I don’t think that there’s going to be an issue.’  What if there is?!

A viewer posed the question that if he/she and a family member had both received the vaccine, could they mix freely?  The answer was that Professor Rampmann could not be 100% certain that transmission was not possible, following the vaccine, but to ‘assume’ immunity three weeks after the second injection.

Similarly, another viewer asked whether one can spread the virus following the vaccine?  The answer?  ‘Don’t know’.  Apparently, this will ‘only be revealed down the line.’

Is it safe to breastfeed having had the vaccination?  In Professor Rampmann ‘s words, ‘We are still studying this, at the moment’.

She went on to say that it was ‘quite possible booster vaccines will be required’ but this would be determined by extended observation.  Those vaccinated will be ‘followed up’ for the next two years …

Did that allay my fears?  Answer my questions?  On the contrary.  Once more, the fragility of the whole situation was highlighted.  Nobody wishes to catch this virus.  Everybody wants to protect their family and loved ones.  However, for those who seek answers, there are too many questions and to dismiss any information or opinion which does not conform to the party line is not helpful and, quite honestly, unacceptable.  Human nature is not, by default, benign.  More’s the pity.  Agendas abound, driven, in the main, by greed and the quest for power.  Such is life.  To accept without question, therefore, is unthinkable.

Civil liberty demands freedom of speech; freedom of choice.  Each one of us has the right to an opinion.  Each one of us has the right to question.  Each one of us has the right to choose.  What happened to that?

Ode to COVID.   The link to a powerful, thought-provoking video on YouTube.  ‘No need to travel, to dress or to move …’  Just click.

This is Trish, signing off.