Prime Minister Scott Morison, along with Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt, have proudly announced that Australia has just entered into two further vaccines agreements with Novavax and Pfizer/BioNTech with a cost to taxpayers of $1.5 billion dollars.
The Prime Minister announced an investment of $1.7 billion dollars to secure vaccines from Oxford/AstraZeneca and University of Queensland /CSL on September 7, bringing the total dollars spent on vaccine pipeline procurement to $3.2 billion. That money comes directly from our pockets, so let’s take a closer look at where our hard-earned tax dollars are going.
The Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine has been plagued with issues throughout the trials, which were paused globally when a participant from the UK trials contracted transverse myelitis. The trials have since resumed globally in all countries except for the United States. This same vaccine trial has tragically cost a 28 year old doctor in Brazil, a phase three trial participant, his life. Interestingly, this doctor was part of the placebo testing group. He was not administered an inert placebo as one would assume; he was reportedly being dosed with a market approved meningococcal vaccine. More on this topic in another article.
The Prime Minister advised that Novavax will supply 40 million vaccine doses and Pfizer/BioNTech will provide 10 million, if the vaccines are proven safe and effective. With these vaccines being rushed to market, is there any way to know if the vaccines are either safe or effective by the time the first doses are administered in early 2021?
The FDA have set the benchmark for efficacy of a Covid-19 vaccine at 50% to get the green light for public consumption. An excerpt from their Development and Licensure Guidelines reads: “To ensure that a widely deployed COVID-19 vaccine is effective, the primary efficacy endpoint point estimate for a placebo-controlled efficacy trial should be at least 50%, and the statistical success criterion should be that the lower bound of the appropriately alpha-adjusted confidence interval around the primary efficacy endpoint point estimate is >30%.”.
It is becoming increasingly obvious that there is a large amount of risk and little benefit, associated with these rushed to market vaccines.
Alarmingly, the newly acquired Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, “contains genetic material messenger called mRNA. It injects people with the genetic material necessary to grow the "spike protein" of SARS-CoV-2 inside their own cells, eliciting an immune response the body will remember when it encounters the real virus.” This information is located within the very same announcement article from the Age.
Scientists and ethicists are abounding alarms about this new, untested, and very controversial experimental RNA technology. Instead of injecting an antigen and adjuvant as with traditional vaccines, this technology plugs a small piece of coronavirus genetic code into human cells, altering DNA throughout the human body and programming our cells to produce antibodies to fight the virus. MRNA vaccines are a form of genetic engineering called “germ line editing”, with these genetic alterations passed down to future generations.
In January the Geneva Statement, the world’s leading ethicists and scientists, called for an end to this kind of experimentation. “The ‘Geneva Statement on Heritable Human Genome Editing: The Need for Course Correction’ points to the need to clarify misrepresentations, center societal consequences and concerns, and foster meaningful public empowerment and deliberation on the potential uses of this species-altering technology. It is a robust and cautionary statement about the future of heritable genome editing that seeks to disrupt the current trajectory of discussions about the applications of this technology and demands broad societal consensus before any decision is made about whether to allow its use in humans”. You can read the full statement here.
Keep in mind that Covid vaccines have been allowed to skip the critical animal testing phase in order to get products out to market as quickly as possible. Renowned Doctor Peter Hotez warns of potentially fatal consequences of skipping animal studies “if there is immune enhancement in animals, that’s a showstopper”. Former NIH Scientist Judy Mikovits says it’s criminal to test MRNA vaccines on humans, “MRNA can cause cancers and other dire harms that don’t surface for years”. The associated risks with the multitude of unknowns, minimal testing and rushing to market are evident, and disturbing to say the least.
There are mounting concerns in the medical industry, as well as in the general population. The Barrington Declaration was established on the 5th of October 2020, citing over 661,000 signatures at the time of writing, declaring that “epidemiologists and public health scientists have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.” Of those signatures, over 11,000 are medical and public health scientists, and over 33,000 are medical practitioners.
The public health risk for Covid-19 has been vastly downgraded since the original and grossly inaccurate modelling was released. Even though this original modelling was proven to be inaccurate, it is still being used to justify lockdowns, mask mandates and severe restrictions around the globe. As per CDC data, the infection fatality rate of Covid-19 is more than 50 times less than this original modelling, offering a >99.4% survival rate across all ages. Is decimating the global economy and rushing dangerous and untested vaccines to market, a proportionate response to the inherent risk?
For people asking about the safety studies on these vaccines, please understand that ALL Covid-19 vaccines are in still in trial phases, no long-term safety studies have been done. For example, with the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has granted a provisional determination so the vaccine can be fast-tracked, and no clinical data on the safety and efficacy of the vaccine needs to be submitted for SIX years according to the Australian Government. If alarm bells were not already ringing, they are now.
Is our government justified in spending billions of our hard-earned tax-payer dollars on these rushed to market vaccines, making them “as mandatory as possible”, with dangerous and untested technology contained therein? There will be no safety testing data available when the first doses of these vaccines are being administered to the public. In fact, there will not be any data available for at least six years or more.
It is time for our government to be transparent. Where there is risk, there must be choice. Where there is risk, there must be informed consent. Where there is risk, one must have the right to say no, free of coercion or penalty.
It is time for us to stand up. Change the politician or change the politician.
Our articles and rebuttal pieces are written by our writers on our volunteer team