Vaccine Shill Refuses To Disclose Conflicts Of Interest

All downhill from here for 'Viki Male'

Update: ‘Viki’ Is Confirmed To Have Received Money Directly From The Vaccine Industry (After A Retroactive Update)

LuckyPokerSocks asked Viki Male a pertinent question if they had any pharmaceutical disclosures or conflicts of interest. ‘Viki Male’ had been vigourously arguing to absolutely insist no vaccine ever has caused any miscarriages by touting a Google Document that mostly consists of slideshows and weird news articles.

They could have simply just said ‘yes’ to LuckyPokerSocks question, and that would have been the end of it.

Instead, ‘Viki Male’ dishonestly replied in the negative that they “have no Pharma COIs” [conflicts of interest], whilst hypocritically calling others ‘misinformation merchants’. Did they really think we’d not be able to see their connections and thus conflicts?

VaccineMole did his usual quirky digging, and found a trove of stuff. The Daily Beagle spotted something in that dig is extra eyebrow raising that VaccineMole wasn’t aware of, but we’ll start with the connections.

If you head over to the ‘Viki Male’ Twitter profile, you will see the generic passport style photograph, and the claim they work as an immunologist for Imperial College. Notice they also mention ‘NKCells’.

If you head over to this Imperial College London page, you will see the exact same generic passport style photograph, plus the mention of immunology, plus the mention of NK cells:

The first Conflict of Interest they dishonestly refuse to disclose is a rather simple one to prove. Imperial College London are working on “second generation” mRNA shots:

“I believe that this virus is going to change and that the vaccines we have approved right now are just not going to be as effective as we think they are,” says Danny Altmann, an immunologist at Imperial College London.

Imperial College London immunologists working on mRNA shots for Imperial College London! ‘Viki Male’ seems to have conveniently and deceptively omitted that conflict of interest.

mRNA shots that are also impacted by mRNA instability as noted by the BMJ:

It is an issue relevant not just to Pfizer-BioNTech’s vaccine but also to those produced by Moderna, CureVac, and others, as well as a “second generation” mRNA vaccine being pursued by Imperial College London.

Oh Danny Boy

Danny Altmann, as mentioned in the above Scientific American quote is working on the mRNA shots, like ‘Viki Male’, also works on NK Cells, Immunology and is affiliated with the Immuno-Pathology Network. The purposes of the Immuno-Pathology Network:

[…] is to ensure effective communication between basic research scientists (biology, chemistry, physics, bioengineering), clinicians, public health experts and environmental scientists with an interest in immune-pathology across and within Faculties at Imperial College London

Notice it is “based with the Department of Immunology and Inflammation”, the same place where Danny Altmann works?

Very close knit. So close knit, in-fact, that ‘Viki Male’ worked on a paper directly with Danny Altmann himself!

Supposedly this exerts no influence, at all, in the slightest. Does ‘Viki Male’ know what ‘Conflict of Interest’ even means? Of course they do, they’re just deceptive.

More Financial Conflict Of Interests

On the page for ‘Viki Male’, they list numerous Conflicts of Interest influences (but remember, they deceptively declared when a member of the public asked, that they don’t have any):

‘Viki Male’, you do realise we know most of those are pro-vaccine organisations, right? Of course you do. You wrote a paper on ‘vaccine hestiancy’, so you know disclosing this would discredit your message immediately.

Wellcome To The Jungle

One listed by ‘Viki Male’ is that of prior work for the Wellcome Trust.

This one is pretty easy to demonstrate: Wellcome Trust spent £16 billion on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine research. But no conflict of interest by our misinformation merchant, apparently.

Run MRC

The other most obvious contender is MRC. MRC is short for ‘MRC CRH’, which means Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health. They’re based at the University of Edinburgh and financed by them.

If this sounds familiar it should. It seems people who work for MRC have a nasty habit of not disclosing their conflicts of interest. The Daily Beagle exposed an MRC reproduction paper which, not only was rife with misinformation such as redacted tables and self-admitted bad data, but also huge undisclosed conflicts of interest.

Re-quoting the key portion, the University of Edinburgh financials page is absolutely rife with vaccine industry financial interests, including these whoppers:

• Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation £10,372,408 (pro-vaccine research group)

• Janssen Pharmaceutica NV £6,888,106 (manufacturers of the J&J shot)

• UK Department of Health £1,236,443

Other pro-vaccine influences listed include:

• GlaxoSmithKline £912,247

• Department of Defense £714,873 (see our US army propaganda article for more details)

• University of Oxford £577,468 (worked with AstraZeneca on the Oxford-AstraZeneca shot)

• Industrial Biotechnology Innovation Centre £478,613

• Ovascience Inc £467,433 (female infertility biotech research group)

• US Army Research Laboratory £391,738

• Astra Zeneca £327,786

• Merck Inc £286,667

• Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH £257,679 (AKA the people who caused the 2007 Foot and Mouth outbreak)

• Lamellar Biomedical Limited £145,001

• UCB Pharma SA £120,521

• Novartis Pharma £104,000

• Genzyme Corporation £101,289 (owned then ditched by Sanofi)

• Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. £100,000 (La Roche manufactures PCR tests besides biologic tech)

• Sanofi Pasteur £81,490

• Ferring Pharmaceuticals £80,500

• MicroPharm £76,000

• Institut Pasteur £66,666 (yes, that number is real)

• The Canadian International Resources and United States Department of Agriculture £64,516 (see this part of the vaccine manufacturers cause outbreak article)

• Eli Lilly and Company Limited £61,119

• Proctor & Gamble £56,000

• UCB Celltech £56,000 (see this)

• Biogen Idec £50,000

• UCB Pharma SA £23,967 (unclear why these are separate)

• Galecto Biotech AB £17,503

• Regulus Therapeutics Inc £10,000

• Ingenza £9,565

• Astra Zeneca £9,091 (this is presented at the top of the page but distracts from AZ’s much bigger investment)

By our count, there is at least £23,573,256 sourced from pro-vaccine influences, almost accounting for 1/5th of the financial budget for the University of Edinburgh — the majority of which comes from the pro-vaccine Gates Foundation.

So MRC definitely do have a massive financial conflict of interest in vaccines, as their financing comes from the University of Edinburgh, who in turn get 1/5th of their funding from pro-vaccine sources (not counting pro-vaccine government sources).

‘Viki’ Also Forgets All The Vaccine Papers They Worked On

• COVID-19 vaccination and menstruation

• Association between menstrual cycle length and covid-19 vaccination: global, retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data

• Effect of COVID-19 vaccination on the timing and flow of menstrual periods in two cohorts

• SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy

• Menstrual changes after covid-19 vaccination

• Are COVID-19 vaccines safe in pregnancy?

• COVID-19 vaccines: what do we know so far?

Plus the pro-vaccination paper where she expresses a pro-vaccine basis:

• Vaccine hesitancy: current and future challenges

You’re just ‘hesitant’ to get their poison shots, apparently. In the same way ‘Viki Male’ is ‘hesitant’ to disclose their conflicts of interest.

Imperial College London Also Has Conflicts Of Interest

When Imperial College London aren’t working on mRNA shots themselves, they’re also accepting financing via the Gates Foundation and DARPA:

Also vaccine patent holding NIH and pro-vaccine WHO, among others:

So when ‘Viki Male’ falsely proclaims that they have no pharmaceutical conflicts of interest and when they call others ‘misinformation merchants’, remember who the true deceivers are here fellow Beagle readers:

There’s nothing genuine about your views, ‘Viki Male’.

Update: The Daily Beagle Provokes A Response

The Daily Beagle did a public call-out on ‘Viki Male’ work with Danny Altmann. We wrote UCL (instead of ICL) in the hopes it’d prompt a correction (and thus confirmation):

Which it did. Vikki confirmed they collaborated with Danny [Altmann], but tried to insist it was to do with “COVID *infection* - not vaccination”.

They seemed very confused that we were able to do research, and asked where we were “getting this stuff from”. Perhaps they weren’t expecting to be rumbled so soon?

They seemed to think their original dishonest statements about it being “not vaccination” were in the clear. Until we posted this:

The paper in question literally discusses just vaccination, as described in the abstract. The opposite of their claim it was “not vaccination”:

They then admit it was an interview they did, using a sleight-of-hand to focus on the paper’s conflicts of interest (which isn’t what is being discussed here):

But they ignored the fact the paper was about vaccination, and they lied when they said their work was “not vaccination” on the co-authored paper with Danny Altmann.

The other issue is the ‘Jameel’ charity (full name: Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab; short name: J-PAL) in question is that the pro-vaccine organisation Gates Foundation finances J-PAL. Some examples (links in the images):

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

When another poster points out to ‘Viki’ that Gates Foundation finances J-PAL (‘Jameel’), ‘Viki’ just replies — without showing what approach they’ve used — that they “can’t find anything saying that’s the case” (what, not even J-PAL’s own website?):

Alarmingly, “Viki” seems to think it is the job of the conflict of interest to tell them that it is a conflict of interest…

[…] if Bill’s plan is to influence my research by donating to a charity that has given me a grant… he should probably let me know about it.

…and not, instead, for ‘Viki’ to proactively disclose it themselves. Which is how actual conflict of interest disclosures work.

Essentially they’re trying to argue, so long as they make themselves intentionally ignorant of who gives them the money, then they don’t have to make a conflict of interest disclosure about who gives them the money.

There’s probably numerous members of science and academia who are probably going to be in shock after reading this statement.

Confirmed: Accepts Pharmaceutical Financing

On the buried citations page for ‘Viki’ is this paper, which has no direct link (how mysterious).

Searching for the title reveals this paper, with ‘Victoria Male’ the sole author:

The paper seems to have since updated with all conflicts of interest after The Daily Beagle started asking questions, and would you believe it, there are direct ties to the vaccine industry, and they write articles for the Guardian:

[…] support to attend the 16th Vaccine Congress

The 16th Vaccine Congress ‘Viki’? But we thought you said you had “no Pharma COIs”?

What is the ‘16th Vaccine Congress’, you may wonder?

It was hosted at Lake Garda in Italy, between 12-14 September 2022.

Elsevier describes the event:

“Vaccines” is a subsidary of Elsevier and is a journal outlet that’s entirely about, surprise, vaccines!

Elsevier goes on to add:

It even quotes remarks by Daniel Salmon who says it will be of “interest to all vaccinologists”:

So, it’s entirely funded by vaccine groups, for vaccine groups, hosted by vaccine groups… and ‘Viki’ received financing from them? So much for that claim that they only do ‘sequalae to COVID *infection* - not vaccination’ then!

Oh, and the paper was written before they made the false claim they had ‘no’ Pharma COIs. Busted!

---

Subscribe to receive more content from The Daily Beagle.

Expose the conflicts of interests and fraudulent behaviours!

And leave a comment below: