Coercion, informed consent and vaccine manufacturing methods were some of the topics covered by Dr Clare Craig at today’s Irish Medical Council hearing.
Educated at Cambridge and Oxford, Dr Craig - a pathologist - travelled from the UK to give evidence at the fifth and final day of of Dr Billy Ralph’s fitness to practise inquiry.
“Medical ethics is clear that there can be no coercion - no bribery and no blackmail - and yet there were both,” Dr Craig told the inquiry of the covid jab roll out.
The airing of a controversial clip from the Late Late Toy Show of November 2021, set the tone for Dr Ralph’s questions to Dr Craig.
The show prompted the following tweet from Dr Ralph:
Introducing the clip to Dr Craig, Dr Ralph described the Late Late as an ‘iconic’ show in Ireland. He asked Dr Craig for her opinion of the clip as a doctor.
Dr Craig said children should not have been part of that process. She said that in order to fully achieve informed consent, ‘children should not be involved.’
“The risk to children of covid was negligible,” Dr Craig told the inquiry.
“Apart from that, there was an issue whereby these products could never have prevented infection. It was not that they didn’t, it was that they could not prevent infection,” she said.
Dr Craig described how patients were signing consent forms at vaccination centres before they ever saw or spoke to a health professional.
“The usual standards were not happening,” she said.
Under cross examination by Neasa Bird BL, barrister for the CEO of the IMC, Dr Craig answered questions about Billy Ralph’s tweets.
In response to the tweet above, she described how doctors in the UK were given ‘extra money’ when the roll out phase reached the 12-15 age year old age group.
“In the UK when they started the 12-15 year olds, the fact was they were given extra money to do it and I think that speaks for itself.”
“Money should not be part of the decision making process when it comes to vaccines,” she said.
Dr Craig was quizzed in detail on the following post, in which Billy Ralph referred to a parent signing their child up for vaccination as a ‘vile individual.’
Dr Craig said she agreed with the tweet, she said it was factually correct, but said the word 'vile' was not a great choice of word to use.
"It is an emotive word....not a great choice of word...but I think if you are putting children at risk...you should be able to use harsh words," she said.
Neasa Bird BL asked Dr Craig if she accepted that X (formerly twitter) was not the appropriate forum for such a post.
”Would you accept a tweet like is not the appropriate forum?” she asked Dr Craig. ”I do know that Dr Ralph had done everything he could through the proper channels," Dr Craig said.
“The public health officials used it (Twitter) a lot – that was the medium that was used,” she said.
Dr Craig said during 2020 and 2021, the media was used to terrify people ‘to the point there were people that weren’t leaving the house for years after.’ She said the most affected age cohort were people in their thirties.
She described the entire era as a ‘mass hysteria event’ and said doctors had a duty to speak out.
“People were crying when they got their vaccines back in 2021 like it was some sort of religious sacrament. It was incredibly weird,” she told the committee.
On covid, Dr Craig said the virus was spreading via aerosol and not droplets, as was suggested by the World Health Organisation ahead of the introduction of masks.
“If there is a disease spread by droplets then social distancing ought to be able to impact on that disease. But if its spread by aerosols, you just can’t control it.
“And you don’t really have to – we have a natural barrier – the mucosal layer in the respiratory tract. We are protected,” she said.
On ivermectin, Dr Craig said it was absolutely effective. She cited a study presented to the US Senate that found the anti-viral drug reduced mortality between 65 and 92 per cent. She said elderly patients would have benefited from its use.
“We had an inverted situation – where people were sick and could have benefitted from drugs that were being smeared and demonised by the media.
“The reason that was happening, was because the EMA here and the FDA in America, both have rules around pre-approval of vaccines. So there was a situation where there was motivation to smear treatments, because otherwise the vaccines wouldn’t have received emergency authorisation,” she said.
Dr Craig’s evidence concluded at 1.30pm and the session broke for lunch. The afternoon was taken up with closing statements from both sides and legal advice from the committee.
"In effect the committee is being asked to treat divergence from public health guidance as misconduct – that cannot be the case" - Dr Billy Ralph said in his closing statement.
Readers can follow the live tweet series from today’s session here.
There were two freelance reporters present at today’s inquiry so readers should be able to read further accounts of the hearing in main media later today.
This substack is on the road back to the west of Ireland and will revisit the case again for analysis.
This powerful case just highlights how important it is to call all agencies to be transparent and accountable.Well done Louise for your tenacious covering of this and its thanks to people like you ,Billy and Clare, that truth will out.Lets hope we don't have to wait too long to hear that Dr.Billy has been fully vindicated.
This powerful case just highlights how important it is to call all agencies to be transparent and accountable.Well done Louise for your tenacious covering of this and its thanks to people like you ,Billy and Clare, that truth will out.Lets hope we don't have to wait too long to hear that Dr.Billy has been fully vindicated.
Thanks for the fantastic coverage Louise. I was there today and it was wonderful to hear Dr Craig . A powerful ally for Billy .