Covid-19: Response and Excess Deaths

Mr Bridgen’s speech in full

Excess Deaths Debate – Thursday 18 April 2024, Houses of Parliament, London

NB: You can watch the entire debate on Parliamentary TV archives, Timestamp: 14:33:25. Click on this Timestamp from the pull down menu on the righthand side of the web page (see below):

We have also downloaded the video clip, just in case it gets memory-holed and filed under ‘inconvenient truth’. You never can be too careful in these Orwellian times!

Thank you, Mr Speaker, 

We are witnesses to the greatest medical scandal in this country in living memory and possibly ever.

The excess deaths in 2022 and 2023 is that scandal.

Its causes are complex but the novel and untested medical treatment described as a “covid vaccine” is a large part of the problem.

I have been called an anti-vaxxer as if I have rejected these vaccines based on an ideology.

I want to state clearly and unequivocally that I have not. I am, in fact, double vaccinated. 

Intelligent people must be able to distinguish between being anti-vax and pro-vax but against a product that a) doesn’t work and b) causes enormous harm to a small percentage of people.

I am proud to be one of the few members of parliament with a science degree. It is a great shame there is not more intellectual diversity here. Maybe if there was, there would be less reliance on the Whips Office’s briefings, more independent research and less groupthink. 

I am used to raising issues in this House that no one cares about and no one wants to know about.

Nothing has been learned from the Post Office scandal.

Only two of the five MPs in the room when the Second Sight team were appointed, on my recommendation, to investigate the post office are still in the House of Commons. I am one of them. Michael Rudkin, the national sub-postmaster Federation Chairman who famously saw the live Horizon terminals in the basement of Fujitsu HQ was my constituent.

I have been fighting his corner in this House for many many years. Long before that scandal became national news. Long long before. I was mostly ignored.

I am being ignored again, this time on the issue of excess deaths.  

Yet again, the official narrative is to deny, obfuscate, ridicule and silence dissenting voices.

I say to the House, and I say it with seriousness, this debate – and others like it proposed by me and others – are going to be pored over by future generations.

They will be genuinely agog that the evidence was ignored, that genuine concerns were disregarded and that those raising it were gaslit, smeared and vilified.

The excess deaths scandal bears an uncanny resemblance to the Post Office catastrophe

Both involve:

  • Complacent public bodies
  • Ministers unable to understand the technicalities and mouthing platitudes
  • Malevolent corporations with a vested interest in silencing questions
  • Lives ruined by greed, lies and corruption
  • Most damaging of all is a culture of denial, obfuscation, secrecy and denigration
  • Much of the harm was avoidable

You don’t need to have any scientific training to be horrified by officials deliberately hiding key data in this scandal.

The Covid-19 experimental ‘vaccine’ is a scandal that is happening right now, today, and it must end.

The Office of National Statistics used to release weekly data on deaths per 100,000 in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.

Now it doesn’t. No one will explain why.

The public has a right to that data.

There have been calls – from serious experts whose requests I have amplified repeatedly in this House – for what is called “record-level data” to be anonymised and disclosed.

This data will allow meaningful analysis of deaths after vaccination and settle the issue of whether these experimental treatments are responsible for the increase in excess deaths. 

Far more extensive and detailed data has been released to the pharma companies from publicly funded bodies. Jenny Harries, head of the UKHSA, said this anonymised aggregate death by vaccination status is “commercially sensitive” and shouldn’t be published.

The public is being denied this same data.

Yet again data is hidden with impunity. Just like the Post Office.

You may remember Professor Dame Jenny Harries, who in July 2022, said that masking was a good idea – and I quote, “If I’ve got any respiratory infection it’s a good thing to do, and I think it’s a new lesson for the country.”

She earlier gave the following totally contradictory advice: “The virus will not survive very long outside. Many outdoor events, particularly, are relatively safe.” 

On 11th March 2020 on the issue of masks, she said, “It’s really not a good idea and doesn’t help,” and “in some ways, you may actually risk catching the disease rather than preventing it.”

She was right then. What made her do a U-turn on all these critical points?

Professor Harries has also endorsed a recent massive change in the calculation of the baseline population level used by the ONS to calculate ‘excess deaths’. It is incredibly complex and opaque and by sheer coincidence, it now appears to show a massive excess in deaths in 2020 and 2021 and minimal excess deaths in 2023.

Under the old calculation method, tried and tested for decades, the excess death rate in 2023 was an astonishing 5%, long after the pandemic was over and when you would expect a deficit in deaths because so many people died early in previous years.

20,000 premature deaths are now being airbrushed away in 2023 alone with the “new normal” baseline.


What is even more shocking is the sheer number of mistakes and scandals in this ongoing horror story.

For example, in March 2020, the government conducted a consultation exercise on whether people over a certain age or with disabilities should have Do Not Resuscitate orders imposed on them, known as DNRs. 

A document summarising the proposals was circulated to doctors and hospitals. This was mistakenly treated as formal policy by a number of care homes and GPs up and down the country who enacted it.

At the same time, multiple hospitals introduced a policy that they would not admit patients with Do Not Resuscitate orders because they thought they would be overwhelmed. 

Many people died as a result who did not need to, as nurses did TikTok videos while their hospitals lay empty.

Another example:

Fear kills. It kills because people don’t seek needed medical care for fear of the virus, a virus which has a 99.8% survival rate. 

It kills because it has been proven that increased stress can suppress the immune system or even be fatal in vulnerable people.

It kills because people who were trying to get care were told to isolate.

It kills because frightened staff were too eager to ventilate to reduce aerosols in the ward. 

It kills because isolated, vulnerable and elderly people are abandoned by family and friends. 

It’s not just patients who are frightened. Doctors are frightened too. Frightened for their careers. Frightened for their reputation. Frightened of the GMC. Frightened to do anything not prescribed by the authorities who set the protocols. 

There have been many doctors and scientists who have bravely spoken out on this, risking their careers and livelihoods, people like Dr Aseem Malhotra, Professor Norman Fenton, Dr David Cartland and Professor Angus Dalgleish to name but a few. Not to forget all of the team at the Hart Group including Dr Clare Craig, who has been so instrumental in helping me put together this speech today. 

Another example is that during Covid, doctors failed to call out a dangerous change in protocol. The average time to death from covid symptoms starting was 18 days.

It is a little-known fact that the body clears all the virus within around 7 days.

What kills people is that some people, especially the vulnerable, have an excessive immune response.

Doctors have been treating this for decades with steroids, antibiotics for secondary pneumonia infections and other standard protocols.

But, not this time.

Even though the virus was long gone, doctors abandoned the standard clinical protocols because covid was a new virus.

They sent people home and told them to take paracetamol until their lips turned blue.

Then they sedated them, put them on ventilators and watched them die.

It gets worse, the protocol was a binary choice between two treatment tracks. Once admitted, ill patients were either to be ventilated in intensive care or, if they were not fit for that level of care, they were to be given end-of-life medication including Midazolam and Morphine. 

The body responsible for this protocol – NG163 which was published on 3rd April 2020 – is called the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence – NICE.

Giving Midazolam and Morphine to people dying of cancer is reasonable but they have a side effect. The side effect is that these drugs have a respiratory depressant effect.

It is hard to imagine a more stupid idea than to give people struggling to breathe, drugs that do that. Yet that’s what they did.

Why was the warning letter regarding the use of Midazolam in NICE guideline NG163 to the British Medical Journal on 19th May 2020 signed by two Professors and nine Doctors ignored? Especially as it would seem it’s a replica of Abolished Liverpool Care Pathway in dosages and combined use of Midazolam plus an opioid. 

NG163 stated that a blanket start dose of 2.5 mg of Midazolam should be injected regardless of age, body weight and comorbidities, how can this be medically acceptable as results show titration was not possible at such a dose for many elderly and who authorised it? 

Why was Midazolam then removed from the same updated guideline NG191 on 30th November 2023? (As it was removed is it now considered and admitted it was a mistake to ignore the warning of the inclusion of that specific drug in NG163)? 

It’s now been confirmed by subsequent letters from Ministers to families that doctors and nurses should have treated the individual patient with their own knowledge rather than strictly follow NICE guideline NG163 (as suggested by Quince and Stephenson) so if the warning letter from 11 experts to the BMJ was correct is the blame with NICE, NHS England or individual doctors and nurses, should legal action find verdicts of unlawful killing? 

I would like to pay tribute to the Scottish Covid Inquiry which is hearing extensive, heartbreaking evidence of the effect of this alternative protocol on real people, real lives and sadly real and unnecessary deaths. People scared. People angry. People dying. People gasping for their lives away who might have been saved. 

I very much hope that the eventual Scottish Inquiry Report addresses in detail the NICE  decision making on the alternative protocols for those with Covid.

All these deaths were ascribed by the government to covid as if no other factors needed to be investigated.

But this is one example of a scandal that if it wasn’t for the Scottish Inquiry would never be investigated and never learned from.

Anyone who raised this problem during the pandemic was smeared as a covid denier.

Even worse

NICE has now removed these alternative protocols from its website. All other old protocols are still there for historical reference.

Why have NICE removed this protocol from their website? Are they ashamed of the harm they caused?

They certainly should be.

What can we learn from this? Doctors don’t challenge what they are told. Protocols with no authors are distributed and doctors fall in line.

We need doctors who are prepared to put their necks on the line for the sake of their patients, but we don’t have them and the whole system is broken as a result.

Here is another example.

Not a single death certificate was written saying that death was due to the rare brain clots caused by AstraZeneca until the MHRA said there was a link. Then the death certificates started to trickle in.

That’s not the scandal.

The scandal is that doctors wait for authorities to tell them they could label a death as vaccine-linked before they will do it. They are afraid of being smeared or reported to the GMC.

In the meantime, the MHRA relies on the evidence from death certificates in order to identify a problem.

That’s the scandal.

It wasn’t until other countries and public and political pressure FORCED the MHRA to admit the link between vaccines and blood clots causing death that they finally admitted it. And THEN doctors started putting it on death certificates.

There is a stark contrast in how deaths and illnesses after vaccination have been recorded compared to Covid. After a positive test, any illness and any death was attributed to the virus. After the experimental and emergency-use vaccine, no illness and no death occurred. Both are totally unscientific approaches. That is why we have to look to other data sources – excess deaths to determine if there is an issue. 

Safe and Effective

The fear deliberately stoked by the government promoted the idea of being rescued by a saviour vaccine. The chanting of the safe and effective narrative began. The phrase seems to have hypnotised the nation. 

“Safe and Effective” was the slogan used to market Thalidomide. 

After that scandal rules were put in place to prevent such marketing in future. Pharma companies are prohibited from saying “safe and effective” without significant caveats.

That didn’t matter this time because the media, the government and authorities turned into the pharma marketing department.

It is hard to now hear the word safe without the echo of “and effective”. 

But they are not safe and effective. In March 2021, when the majority of UK citizens had already received these novel products, Pfizer signed a contract with Brazil  and South Africa in which they said, “the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and … adverse effects of the Vaccine… are not currently known.”

These so-called vaccines were the least effective vaccines ever. Is there anyone left under the illusion that they prevented any infections? 

Yet, even the Prime Minister now has one eye on history. 

When he was at the dispatch box on 31st January at PMQs, following my question, he could not bring himself to add “and effective” to his “safe” mantra that the vaccines were safe.

Why is the Prime Minister gaslighting the 163 successful claims made to the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme totalling an incredible £19.5m in compensation for harm caused by the Covid vaccines? Haven’t they suffered enough already? Those 163 are the tip of the iceberg by the way. 

It should be noted that the maximum payment is £120,000. So each of those 163 got the maximum possible award, which tells you something perhaps.

That same compensation scheme paid out a total of £3.5m between 1997-2005 with an average of 8 claims per year. That’s for ALL other claims in the entire country for all vaccines.

So much for ‘safe’. 

How about effective?

Even by 25th October 2021, the former Prime Minister and Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip even admitted that, and again, I quote, “It doesn’t protect you against catching the disease, and it doesn’t protect you against passing it on.”

Looking at the levels of the virus in sewage shows that the post-vaccine wave was in the same order of magnitude and duration as the previous waves. 

Vaccines changed nothing. They were not safe. And they were not effective.

Those who imposed these vaccines knew full well they could never prevent infections in this kind of disease. 

An injection in the arm cannot do that. Only immunity on the surface of the airway and lungs can prevent viral infection. Antibodies in the blood cannot. 

In Dr Anthony Fauci’s own words, “It is not surprising that none of the predominantly mucosal respiratory viruses has ever been effectively controlled by vaccines”

He continued, “This observation raises a question of fundamental importance: if natural mucosal respiratory virus infections do not elicit complete and long-term protective immunity against reinfection, how can we expect vaccines, especially systemically administered non-replicating vaccines to do so”

The mantra of “safe and effective” has so brainwashed some people that we now have the outrageous situation where the loving mother of a 24 year old man, who had the mental age of an 18 month old has been threatened in court with jail time, by a lawyer charged with representing her son’s best interests, because she does not want him vaccinated. 

He has had covid meaning he has the optimum possible protection against a subsequent infection already. 

The judge has used the argument that Tom would choose to be vaccinated for altruistic reasons but the court has a duty to act in his best interests not the interests of society.  

Altruism means taking vaccinations to help others. But, these vaccines do not protect others! They do not prevent infection. Why is our system persecuting this mother? What are they hoping to achieve? 

Only a few days ago, the ABPI, the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry rapped Pfizer on the knuckles for the sixth time and said their marketing practices had brought the industry into disrepute. They were asked to pay £30,000 in administrative expenses with no fine on top. The person heading the ABPI at the moment is also the head of Pfizer UK. The MHRA have a statutory duty to carry out this work and has handed the responsibility over to the industry itself. This is an outrageous conflict of interest.

Another drug produced by Pfizer was Paxlovid designed to supposedly treat Covid. It was approved in December 2021. 

Pfizer this week revealed the trial results for Paxlovid that had been hidden for two years. 

The study showed that Paxlovid did not work to reduce illness.

Worse still, it caused rebound infections in 25% of those treated. 

Worse still it causes serious drug interactions and other side effects.

Will Pfizer be held accountable for this? I am not holding my breath.


But let’s return to excess deaths. The Australian government has launched an Inquiry into their excess death problem.

Australia is almost unique as a case study for excess deaths. They had the vaccine before they had Covid.

Their excess deaths are not so easily blamed on the long-term effects of a virus. Like us, they saw a rise in deaths that began in May 2021 and has not let up since. The impact was evident on the ambulance service first. 

South Australia saw a 67% increase in cardiac presentations of 15-44 year olds which peaked in November 2021 before covid hit. 

We saw a similar deeply worrying effect here too:

Calls for life-threatening emergencies in the UK rose from 2000 per day to 2500 per day in May 2021 and it has not returned to normal. 

Queensland doctors called the problem a “ticking time bomb” in April 2021 and described a “flood of patients.” 69 

By October 2021, despite it being springtime in Australia headlines reported on ambulances unable to drop off patients in hospitals that were at full capacity.67 

Mark McGowan, Premier of Western Australia, said he could not explain the overwhelmed hospitals, “Our hospitals are under enormous pressure. This has been something no one has ever seen before. Why it is, is hard to know.”68

By April 2022, Yvette D’ath Queensland health minister said about the most urgent ambulance calls (“code ones”), QUOTE: “I don’t think anyone can explain why we saw a  40% jump in code ones… We just had a lot of heart attacks and chest pains and trouble breathing, respiratory issues. Sometimes you can’t explain why those things happen but unfortunately, they do.”70

Omicron caused excess deaths in Australia from 2022 onwards, however, there is a huge chunk of excess deaths which doctors have not been able to blame on the virus.

Could these deaths be caused by the vaccine? Very few dare ask, Mr Speaker. 

Remember the warning from Kate Bingham, head of the covid vaccine task force, who said in October 2020 that vaccinating healthy people who have little risk from covid “could cause them some freak harm.”

Has there been some freak harm? The data on disability claimants would suggest the answer is yes! Both here and in the USA there was a rocket in the number of working-aged people unable to work because of long-term sickness. The increase began in May 2021. Thankfully these figures have stopped climbing here and in the USA in 2023. 

The timing, or temporal link, suggests vaccines as the cause rather than the virus.

A rise in sickness and a rise in deaths that both occurred from May 2021 in Australia and in the UK despite their seasonal differences and despite their different covid trajectories is highly suggestive that vaccines are the underlying problem here.

It is important to remember how these vaccines were made. Traditionally the key to making a vaccine is to ensure that the pathological parts of the virus or bacteria are inactivated so the recipient can develop an immune response without the dangers of the disease. 

In stark contrast, these so-called covid vaccines used the most pathological part of the virus in its entirety. 

The harm is systemic because, contrary to what everyone was told, the lipid nanoparticles spread throughout the whole body after injection, potentially affecting all organs. At the time everyone was being reassured that the injection was broken down within the arm at the injection site, regulators knew or ought to have known of these problems. 

Furthermore, there is now plentiful evidence that the drug results in continued protein production for many months, even years, in some people. The deaths, thus far have been predominantly cardiac. but there may be more deaths to come.


Dr Robert Tindle is the retired director of the Clinical Medical Virology Centre in Brisbane and Emeritus Professor in Immunology. 

This month Dr Tindle published a paper highlighting the multiple potential harms from the vaccines including harm to the immune system which – as with anything which disrupts the immune system – can potentially increase the risk of cancer. 

There are other reasons to be concerned about cancer being induced by these vaccines. 

Cancer is a genetic disease that arises from errors in DNA allowing cells to grow uncontrollably. 

Moderna has multiple patents describing methods for reducing the risk of cancer induction from their mRNA products. 

This risk comes from material interrupting the patient’s DNA. 

It turns out that what we were told was an mRNA injection actually had very high quantities of DNA in it. This massively increases the risk of disturbing a patient’s own DNA. 

Worse still the DNA that was injected contained sequences that were hidden from the regulator. This was no accident. Yet again crucial information was hidden with impunity. 


The evidence is clear that these vaccines have caused deaths.

Despite this, they have been described as safe and effective.

But, for a small proportion of people, the vaccines have caused serious harm including death.

Neither are they effective. The vaccine does not prevent infection or transmission and when the data is looked at objectively, it does not prevent serious illness and death. 

These are hard truths to face.

We must face them if we want to learn the lessons from the last few years.

I’ve been right before.

At some point that will be evident. Let’s not wait as long as the post office scandal before we admit it.

It is time to take the politics out of science and put some actual science back into politics. 

So, Mr Speaker, I offer Members of this House the same opportunity which I offered the Prime Minister: ‘To be on the right side of history, the right side of science and on the side of the people.’ 

Sadly, given the PM’s compromised position regarding his investments in big pharma, he only dug himself an even bigger hole! 

I wish I was wrong about the experimental vaccines but the evidence was overwhelming 18 months ago it is absolutely unequivocal now. 

I call on this House to do the right thing and protect our constituents, even if it means standing up to the most powerful vested interest in the world.

Please follow and like us:
Visit Us