Concerns from a distinguished Professor
Angus Dalgleish is a Professor of Oncology in the Infection and Immunity Research Institute at St George’s University of London. He is a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians in the UK and Australia, Royal College of Pathologists and the Academy of Medical Scientists. In his current post he studies the immunology of cancer and the development of immunotherapies to treat, in particular, melanoma.
According to Wikipedia he is a co-discoverer of the CD4 receptor as the major cellular receptor for HIV. Angus is also a vaccine researcher and founded a biotech company developing cancer vaccines.
The Professor was an early proponent of the Covid lab leak theory but also suggested that the Covid spike protein contained artificially inserted sequences. He wrote a paper on his theories in early 2020 but, surprisingly (sarcasm), failed to find a publisher. To get around this, he “disguised” his study as a vaccine paper, which managed to get published and to date has had over 250,000 views.
In true fact checking style, Full Fact looked at the claim that his paper said that Covid had been artificially engineered and concluded that “A Norwegian virologist has made claims about the non-natural origins of the new coronavirus. But this claim is not in a new peer-reviewed paper he co-authored. The scientific community widely agrees that the virus was not artificially engineered.” By ignoring that Professor Dalgleish co-authored the paper, was this a clever way (I’m being generous with the use of clever) of not admitting that the authors were trying to tell the world that the virus looked engineered.
The Full Fact fact check came about as a result of a Telegraph columnist, Allison Pearson discussing the paper with former Chief of MI6 (British Intelligence), Richard Dearlove (Still such a great spy name, however often I read it). Even the former spook suggested that the paper said that Covid was engineered but oh no, Full Fact knew better.
Professor Dalgleish’s paper also warned that SARS-CoV2’s aetiology risked creating ineffective or actively harmful vaccines, including the risk of antibody-dependent enhancement. The authors said that these types of problems in vaccine design were illustrated from past experience in the human immunodeficiency viruses domain.
When it comes to vaccine harms, it is often difficult to establish whether they have actually been caused by the vaccines or by something else such as lockdowns or treatments being cancelled. That is why evidence, whether anecdotal or not, from experts in their field, such as Professor Dalgleish is so important.
Today, he writes in the Daily Sceptic about what he is seeing as a practising oncologist. People with stable disease are rapidly declining after having a booster shot. His full letter, to Dr. Kamran Abbasi, the Editor in Chief at the British Medical Journal is below.
Dear Kamran Abbasi,
Covid no longer needs a vaccine programme given the average age of death of Covid in the U.K. is 82 and from all other causes is 81 and falling.
The link with clots, myocarditis, heart attacks and strokes is now well accepted, as is the link with myelitis and neuropathy. (We predicted these side effects in our June 2020 QRBD article Sorensen et al. 2020, as the blast analysis revealed 79% homologies to human epitopes, especially PF4 and myelin.)
However, there is now another reason to halt all vaccine programmes. As a practising oncologist I am seeing people with stable disease rapidly progress after being forced to have a booster, usually so they can travel.
Even within my own personal contacts I am seeing B cell-based disease after the boosters. They describe being distinctly unwell a few days to weeks after the booster – one developing leukaemia, two work colleagues Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and an old friend who has felt like he has had Long Covid since receiving his booster and who, after getting severe bone pain, has been diagnosed as having multiple metastases from a rare B cell disorder.
I am experienced enough to know that these are not the coincidental anecdotes that many suggest, especially as the same pattern is being seen in Germany, Australia and the USA.
The reports of innate immune suppression after mRNA for several weeks would fit, as all these patients to date have melanoma or B cell based cancers, which are very susceptible to immune control – and that is before the reports of suppressor gene suppression by mRNA in laboratory experiments.
This must be aired and debated immediately.
Angus Dalgleish MD FRACP FRCP FRCPath FMedSci
Angus Dalgleish is a Professor of Oncology at St George’s, University of London.