|
By Robyn Chuter
“Psychological operations (PSYOP) are operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.” Psychological operations (United States) I’m far from the first person to point out that the international response to the emergence and spread of SARS-CoV-2 has many elements of a psychological operation (PSYOP). From the obviously faked videos of people abruptly collapsing in the streets in Wuhan (my personal favourite is the guy at 38 seconds into the compilation; you’d think the people behind this farce would stump up the yuan to pay decent actors, for god’s sake), to the invocation of the 1918-19 “Spanish flu” (which had a death rate over four times as high as SARS-CoV-2 and disproportionately affected young, healthy people with their whole lives ahead of them, resulting in far more years of healthy life lost than our current plague, whose median age of death is higher than average life expectancy), to the hyperbolic claims of overflowing hospitals (helped along by CBS’s creative repurposing of footage from a COVID-19 ward in Bergamo, Italy) while record numbers of health care workers were being furloughed or laid off due to the failure of the promised apocalypse to materialise, to the social media frenzy over a photo of piles of coffins of COVID-19 victims in Italy… which turned out to be from the 2013 sinking of a boat full of African refugees, to the mass media frenzy over mass graves on Hart Island, New York… which turns out to have been the burial place for unclaimed body in that city since 1869… yes folks, it’s been a veritable tutti frutti of PSYOPs of every imaginable flavour. While most of these flavours had a short shelf-life and hence rapidly disappeared from the COVID-19 ice cream stand, there’s been a few perennial favourites. And among them, “long COVID” deserves a special mention. Australia’s taxpayer-funded national broadcaster, the ABC, has provided breathless (pun intended) coverage of the bogeyman of persistent post-viral symptoms after recovery from COVID-19 since July 2020. It has relentlessly barraged its hapless audience with horror stories of debilitating fatigue, a brain fog “that’s difficult to quantify”, shortness of breath and chest pain ever since (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here). To be clear, post-viral syndrome is nothing new. Over the course of my 25 years in clinical practice, I’ve seen scores of clients who suffered persistent symptoms after recovering from a wide variety of infections, including influenza, glandular fever and Ross River fever. An abnormal immune response to the initial viral infection is believed to be the cause of the fatigue, pain, muscle weakness and cognitive impairment that may linger on for weeks, months and even years. But the spectre of “long COVID” has, from the start, been invoked to push a particular narrative about SARS-CoV-2: that this virus with an infection fatality rate no worse than a bad flu is actually an existential threat to humanity, whose spread must be stopped in order to save young people from a tsunami of brain damage. And furthermore, even young people who are at statistically zero risk of dying from SARS-CoV-2 infection must receive experimental injections in order to save them from the threat of long COVID. (For a while there, the ABC was even peddling the notion that getting jabbed could cure long COVID, even though the lead author of the tiny [44 participants, all of whom had been hospitalised for COVID-19 – that is, they were pretty seriously ill], as-yet-unpublished study hastened to point out that the “small overall improvement in Long Covid symptoms” that participants reported after receiving a jab were just as likely to be attributable to the placebo effect. Desperate much, Aunty?) Oddly enough, despite the medical experts interviewed by the ABC clearly stating that the risk of long COVID is higher in older people who suffered more severe initial illness (see here and here, and confirmed here), the public broadcaster only seems to manage to find young people, most of whom had mild illness, to feature in its heartstring-tuggers about the travails of COVID long haulers (see here, here and here). There are just a few teensy weensy widdle pwoblems with this whole long COVID narrative:
But yeah, aside from that, it’s a perfectly sound story. 1. Estimates of the prevalence of long COVID are all over the mapOur beloved Aunty tells us that long COVID “affects between 2.3 per cent to 76 per cent of people who get COVID-19″. Wait, what? That’s one hell of a range! How can you even begin to think sensibly about whether you’d rather take an experimental jab that is at least 5 times more likely to lead to your premature demise than COVID-19 itself or run the risk of natural infection with SARS-CoV-2 (for which safe and effective early treatments for those at high risk of severe illness are available), when no one knows whether long COVID afflicts one in fifty or three out of four people who get infected… or any random number in between? To add to the confusion, when the ABC interviewed Professor Gail Matthews, lead investigator of the ADAPT study which found that about 20% of Australian COVID-19 patients had some type of long COVID, they quoted her as asserting – I kid you not – that “The only things that predict it [the propensity to develop long COVID] are the severity of the initial illness… they tend to be older, to be men and have co-morbidities, and the other factor that predicted whether you were more likely to get long COVID was being female.” Hang on a minute, Prof Matthews. Did you just say that either being a man or being female predicts one’s likelihood of developing long COVID? That doesn’t leave many people out, does it? 2. Believing you had COVID when you actually didn’t is more likely to lead to long COVID symptoms than actually having had COVIDStrap yourself in, this one’s a doozy. A study just published in JAMA Internal Medicine asked 26 823 adults from the population-based French CONSTANCES cohort whether they believed they had experienced COVID-19, and whether they had experienced any of the most frequently-reported physical symptoms of long COVID – sleep problems, joint pain, back pain, muscular pain, sore muscles, fatigue, poor attention or concentration, skin problems, sensory symptoms (pins and needles, tingling or burning sensation), hearing impairment, constipation, stomach pain, headache, breathing difficulties, palpitations, dizziness, chest pain, cough, diarrhoea, anosmia (loss of the sense of smell), and “other symptoms” – on a persistent basis since their supposed bout with the rona. The researchers also used an antibody test to determine whether participants had actually had SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here’s what they found: “Persistent physical symptoms 10 to 12 months after the COVID-19 pandemic first wave were associated more with the belief in having experienced COVID-19 infection than with having laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection.” Association of Self-reported COVID-19 Infection and SARS-CoV-2 Serology Test Results With Persistent Physical Symptoms Among French Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic Or, in plain English, people who falsely believed they had experienced COVID-19 were more likely to have “long COVID” than people who actually had COVID-19. Notice how people who believed they had experienced SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to experience gastrointestinal symptoms, fatigue, impaired attention or concentration, headache, breathing difficulties, palpitations, chest pain and cough, regardless of whether they’d actually had it? After mutual adjustment for belief and serology, the only persistent symptom that was actually more common in people who had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection was anosmia, which is a well-known feature of actual COVID-19: Oh, and by the way, 58% of participants (average age 49, so not exactly spring chickens) who had serological evidence of infection with SARS-CoV-2 didn’t think they had been sick in any way. Boy, this rona sure is a fearsome virus. 3. What brain damage? Although “our ABC” was more than happy to fan the flames of moral panic over “the impacts of COVID on children’s brains”, and brain imaging showed some short-term changes in grey matter in recovered COVID-19 patients, there is simply no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infection poses any such risk in children; “long COVID” simply doesn’t exist in children or teens despite the constant media squawking to the contrary. For that matter, when adults who complained of persistent neurocognitive symptoms (impaired attention, memory, and multitasking abilities, word-finding difficulties, and fatigue) as part of “long COVID” were put through a battery of neuropsychological tests and some fancy-schmancy brain imaging, no significant abnormality was found: “Cognitive testing showed minor impairments only on single-patient level approximately six months after the infection, whereas functional imaging revealed no distinct pathological changes.” Neuropsychological profiles and cerebral glucose metabolism in neurocognitive Long COVID-syndrome The authors concluded that fatigue, rather than persistent cortical dysfunction, may be responsible for long COVID. 4. COVID jabs don’t prevent long COVID in breakthrough infectionsPretty much every country that manages to persuade a high proportion of its citizens to get jabbed enters what Alex Berenson has dubbed “the happy vaccine valley” – a transient dip in COVID-19 cases and deaths, followed by a sharp resurgence as the transient, partial protection conferred by these leaky vaccines wears off. It’s happened in the UK, Israel, Denmark and Germany, among others. So it can reasonably be expected that everyone will eventually get infected with SARS-CoV-2, as the virus transitions from epidemic to endemic. And that makes this six-month follow-up study of almost 10 000 people who developed breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections (i.e. infections after being “fully vaccinated”) worth paying attention to. Not only did being “fully vaccinated” offer no real protection against serious outcomes of infection in people aged over 60 (you know, the only age group that’s actually at any statistically meaningful risk of severe illness), it also failed to prevent long COVID in any age group. The study authors also noted that protection against serious outcomes of infection was strongest in the early phase of follow-up. Hello, happy vaccine valley. Be seeing you soon, unhappy vaccine plateau. Defending yourself against PSYOPsIt’s an unfortunate fact that PSYOPs are part of modern life, and as such, it’s important to have a toolkit to recognise and defend yourself against these “campaigns for your mind”. I highly recommend reading this article in its entirety, but here’s a quick summary:
Final noteI’m not by any means dismissing the idea that long COVID may occur; as mentioned above, I’m very familiar with postviral syndrome. Dr Bruce Patterson has identified changes in the activity of monocytes (a type of white blood cell) in people experiencing persistent symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection, and has developed testing and treatment protocols to address these immune system abnormalities. No one’s suffering should be dismissed. However, there’s a long and inglorious history of pathologising human suffering for profit, and the reification of “long COVID” is a veritable Swiss Army knife of memetic warfare. Forewarned is forearmed.
0 Comments
 Two of Australia’s biggest sporting codes, the AFL and NRL, have succumbed to medical apartheid.
The AFL has made vaccination compulsory for all of its players. The NRL has “issued a directive to clubs that left the mandating of vaccinations in their respective hands”. The Canterbury Bulldogs have informed their players and officials that they expect them to be fully vaccinated. Bulldogs general manager Phil Gould said that “those with the ability to make a difference also have an obligation to do so and at the Bulldogs we take our community responsibility really seriously”. If they took their responsibility ‘really seriously’, they would do their research properly and see the devastation that the vaccines are causing. They would encourage medical freedom, and they would support freedom of choice. They would stand up to tyranny and inspire children and adults around the country to do the same. Several brave players have spoken out against vaccine mandates, including Nelson Asofa-Solomona (Storm), Luke Thompson (Bulldogs), John Asiata (Bulldogs), Dylan Walker (Sea Eagles), Api Koroisau (Panthers) and Jason Taumalolo (Cowboys). Asofa-Solomona posted the following on social media: “Front line nurses speaking out. Ask the question, why are they willing to lose their job to not get the juice? What are they seeing that we don’t see?” Front line nurses are speaking out because they witness firsthand the significant adverse events presenting in hospitals. Adverse events such as myocarditis, anaphylaxis, Guillain-Barre syndrome, Bell’s Palsy, blood clots, strokes and many other neurological, cardiovascular and immunological conditions. We should be listening to the nurses, not shunning them. The NRL have even gone as far as to create segregation within clubs. They have reportedly “told clubs to designate separate eating and bathroom areas for players who are yet to receive two jabs”. “The protocols also restrict players who are unvaccinated or have only had one jab from using indoor gyms, public transport and going to the pub. Additionally, they cannot have visitors at their home or attend other households.” What sort of world are we living in? When did being healthy pose a danger to society? The vaccine does not prevent transmission of the virus. This alone should put an end to all vaccine mandates. A vaccinated person is just as likely to transmit the virus as an unvaccinated person. A preprint study found that there was “no significant difference in cycle threshold values between vaccinated and unvaccinated, asymptomatic and symptomatic groups infected with SARS-CoV-2 Delta”. “Our study is consistent with other recent reports showing similar viral loads among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in settings with transmission of the Delta variant.” “A substantial proportion of asymptomatic, fully vaccinated individuals in our study had low Ct-values, indicative of high viral loads.” Another study in the Lancet showed that “fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections have peak viral load similar to unvaccinated cases and can efficiently transmit infection in household settings, including to fully vaccinated contacts”. A study in the European Journal of Epidemiology demonstrated that “at the country-level, there appears to be no discernible relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days. In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.” Different states and territories have issued different sets of rules. NSW have banned unvaccinated players from training with teammates until December 15 or when the state is 95% vaccinated. However, in QLD, all players can partake in pre-season training while adhering to NRL protocols, but that could change on December 17 when the state opens its borders. Meanwhile, in the ACT, all players can partake in pre-season training while adhering to the NRL protocols, but in VIC, unvaccinated players cannot partake in any team activities. This is another sign that vaccine mandates are purely political and not based on health, science or any semblance of logic. When asked about their club’s vaccination status by Fox Sports, all clubs were willing to share this information except for the Canberra Raiders and New Zealand Warriors. Fox Sports and nearly all of the NRL clubs are obviously unaware that a person’s vaccination status is a private medical record and sharing this information is a breach of privacy and confidentiality. The Canberra Raiders stated that “we won’t be commenting on player vaccination rates”, whilst the New Zealand Warriors said that player vaccination rates “is not information we will make available”. At least these two clubs have some understanding of privacy laws. AFL and NRL players are young, fit and healthy men. They are generally at no risk of developing severe illness, requiring hospitalisation or dying from COVID-19. According to Stanford University Professor John Ioannidis, the infection fatality rate (IFR) for those aged 20-29 is 0.014%, and for those aged 30-39, it is 0.031%. In other words, players aged 20-29 have a survival rate of 99.986%, whilst those aged 30-39 have a survival rate of 99.969%. To put this into perspective, all of these players have more chance of dying in a car accident than they do of dying from COVID-19. Should they be banned from driving too? The NRL and AFL have sold their souls to medical fascism. They are participating in medical apartheid, and for that, they should be truly ashamed. Players, like everyone else in society, have the right to choose what they put into their bodies, and they, like everyone else, should not lose their jobs, incomes and careers because of that choice. This is especially true for a product with no long-term safety data, and more reported deaths from this one vaccine than all other vaccines in the past 30 years, as shown by the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in the US. It’s time to wake up Australia. We are being run by totalitarian governments and organisations that have no regard for an individual’s health or safety. There are already reports surfacing of athletes suffering from cardiac arrest and death in other countries following vaccination. With myocarditis presenting at alarming rates in younger males, are we going to see our sporting stars suffering from heart issues whilst training or playing? To the AFL, NRL and other sporting codes, and to all of the players and officials, you have the power to stop this discrimination and segregation. You are role models for many young men and women in this country. They look up to you. Many follow your every move. It’s not too late. Do the right thing and say no to medical apartheid. Not only for yourselves, but for the entire country.  Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews has hinted that those who don’t receive booster shots will not be considered fully vaccinated moving forward.
Mr Andrews suggested that it would be about the “maintenance of your vaccination status” in order to maintain your ‘freedoms’. “I hope, and we’ll play our part in this, like a month before your six months is up, then you will get a message and your vaccination certificate, the thing that gets you the green tick, you’ll be prompted to go and book a time to go and have your booster shot.” Does this mean that people will need to receive a booster shot every six months? And more importantly, where is the evidence to support such a program? Israel was one of the first countries in the world to roll out booster shots. In order for someone to maintain their vaccine passport, or Green Pass, they are now required to have a booster shot. For the million or more people who haven’t yet had their third dose, they are now restricted from participating normally within society. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky recently announced that the CDC “may need to update our definition of ‘fully vaccinated’ in the future” to only include those who have had three doses of the vaccine. Deputy Chief Medical Officer Michael Kidd explained that “antibody levels fall over time and there is a risk of breakthrough infections where vaccinated people may become infected and at risk of transmitting COVID-19 to others. So, a booster dose, if you like, turbocharges your immune response and provides additional layers of protection to you and to your loved ones, and to the wider community.” The current research shows that immunity wanes relatively quickly. A study conducted in Qatar and published in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that “BNT162b2-induced protection against SARS-COV-2 infection appeared to wane rapidly following its peak after the second dose”. “Estimated BNT162b2 effectiveness against any SARS-CoV-2 infection was negligible in the first 2 weeks after the first dose. It increased to 36.8%... in the third week after the first dose and reached its peak at 77.5%... in the first month after the second dose.” “Effectiveness declined gradually thereafter, with the decline accelerating after the fourth month to reach approximately 20% in months 5 through 7 after the second dose. Effectiveness against symptomatic infection was higher than effectiveness against asymptomatic infection but waned similarly. Variant-specific effectiveness waned in the same pattern.” Another study from Israel, also published in the New England Journal of Medicine, stated that “BNT162b2-induced protection against SARS-COV-2 infection appeared to wane rapidly following its peak after the second dose, but protection against hospitalisation and death persisted at a robust level for 6 months after the second dose”. The most damning study of all is a preprint study that was just released, which concluded that “these data demonstrate a substantial waning of antibody responses and T cell immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, at 6 months following the second immunisation with the BNT162b2 vaccine. Notably, a significant proportion of vaccinees have neutralising titres below the detection limit.” After six months, antibodies were no longer detectable. The booster shot is not different to the initial shot, meaning that protection will mostly wane at a similar rate. Is this why Mr Andrews has suggested a booster shot every six months? The vaccine was also developed for the wild-type virus, such as the Alpha, Beta and Gamma variants. The Delta variant is now the predominant strain, and the virus may continue to mutate. Will this render the vaccine completely ineffective, regardless of booster shots? What’s more concerning is that the Federal government has “secured an additional 85 million doses of Pfizer, which brings Australia’s total Pfizer doses to 125 million”. This is enough to vaccinate the entire population five times over, and it doesn’t even include doses of AstraZeneca or Moderna. What has the government got planned? What are they not telling us? As we know, the long-term safety of the vaccine is unknown. There has already been an enormous amount of death and disability following the roll out of the vaccine. In the US, there have been 818,044 adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, including 117,399 serious injuries and 17,128 deaths. There have been more deaths in ten months from this one vaccine than from all other vaccines in the past 30 years. In Australia, there has been 72,011 adverse events reported to the Therapeutic Goods Administration, including 612 deaths reported shortly after receiving the vaccine. Nine of these deaths have been officially linked to the vaccine. There has been 312 reports of suspected myocarditis, 836 reports of suspected pericarditis, 156 cases of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia (TTS), 131 reports of Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), and 85 reports of immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). All of these conditions are serious and could have devastating long-term ramifications. What’s worse is that there is a maniacal push to vaccinate every man, woman and child. Why? We need to slow down, not speed up. We need to take a step back. We are seeing a rise in cases, which will increase the chance of severe illness and death, in some of the most highly vaccinated countries. Why is there such a cult-like mentality around vaccination? Why have the government purchased so many doses of the vaccine? And what is the government hiding from its citizens? Many people were coerced into taking the vaccine in the first place. Will they be coerced into taking booster shots? Will those who choose not to take a booster shot be locked out of society with the unvaccinated? It’s time to question the motives of those pushing vaccines on the entire population. Where will it end? And at what cost?  “I see it as a day of freedom, it’s a freedom day.”
These were the prophetic words of NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet on Monday 11 October 2021 as Sydney began to emerge from lockdown. Restaurants, cafes, gyms and retails stores welcomed back customers after nearly four months of restrictions, whilst more people were allowed to gather at homes and attend weddings and funerals. However, ‘Freedom Day’ came with a catch. It was for the vaccinated only. Which begs the question… How free are we if we have put an experimental product in our body to attain ‘freedom’? Whilst the vaccinated were out enjoying a beer, having lunch, or hitting the gym, the unvaccinated were locked up at work or home under the same draconian measures they have had to endure for months on end. According to the website History, “Apartheid (“apartness” in the language of Afrikaans) was a system of legislation that upheld segregationist policies against non-white citizens of South Africa”. “Under apartheid, non-white South Africans (a majority of the population) would be forced to live in separate areas from whites and use separate public facilities. Contact between the two groups would be limited. Despite strong and consistent opposition to apartheid within and outside of South Africa, its laws remained in effect for the better part of 50 years.” Sound familiar? Let’s substitute ‘non-white’ with ‘unvaccinated’ for a moment. Apartheid was a system of legislation that upheld segregationist policies against unvaccinated citizens of Australia. Under apartheid, unvaccinated Australians would be forced to live in separate areas from the vaccinated and use separate public facilities. Contact between the two groups would be limited. Prior to resigning as premier of NSW, Gladys Berejiklian stated that she did not want to be “anywhere with someone who’s not vaccinated”. Ms Berejiklian is in effect advocating for apartheid in Australia. The NSW government has opened up to vaccinated residents after reaching their vaccination target of 70%. Further easing will occur when the state reaches the magical 80% vaccination rate. Let’s see how one of the most vaccinated countries in the world is going after reaching this target. Singapore has 83% of it’s eligible population (12 years and older) fully vaccinated. Another 2% have been partially vaccinated. In 2020, 29 people lost their lives to COVID-19. In 2021, that number has skyrocketed. At the time of writing, and with two and a half months of the year remaining, 133 people have died. Singapore began their vaccine rollout at the end of last year. With a vaccine, there has been 4.5 times more deaths. If the vaccine was working, shouldn’t this be the other way around? Currently, 60% of those in hospital, 40% of those of oxygen supplementation, and 35% in ICU are fully vaccinated. Singapore has a 7-day average of 3,303 cases a day. In 2020, the peak 7-day average was 1,005 cases on 26 April. Singapore has had some of the harshest restrictions out of any country in the world. Permanent mask mandates from March last year, maximum social gatherings of 8 people (currently it’s 2 people), a 10:30pm alcohol curfew meaning restaurants and cafes must close at this time, nightclubs have yet to re-open, and some of the strictest contact tracing and isolation in the world. Despite all of these measures, Singapore has been unable to contain the virus. The city state reached their vaccine target of 80% on 29 August. The next day they recorded 288 cases and it has risen exponentially ever since. A study in the European Journal of Epidemiology concluded that “at the country-level, there appears to be no discernible relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days”. “In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people. Notably, Israel with over 60% of their population fully vaccinated had the highest COVID-19 cases per 1 million people in the last 7 days.” “The lack of a meaningful association between percentage population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases is further exemplified, for instance, by comparison of Iceland and Portugal. Both countries have over 75% of their population fully vaccinated and have more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than countries such as Vietnam and South Africa that have around 10% of their population fully vaccinated.” “In summary, even as efforts should be made to encourage populations to get vaccinated it should be done so with humility and respect. Stigmatizing populations can do more harm than good.” Yet, the state and territory governments continue to push the narrative that the vaccine is the ‘only way out’. Clearly, that assumption is flawed at best. “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.” These are the famous words of former US President Ronald Reagan. For those who think that freedom is achieved by injecting a synthetic product into their body with no long term safety data, then unfortunately, they don’t understand what freedom truly is. We are born free. We don’t get freedom. We only give it up. The 11th of October 2021 will not be known as ‘freedom day’. It will be known as the day apartheid began. However, we have the chance to correct this dangerous path we are heading down. We have the chance to unite and be all inclusive. Choosing to vaccinate is exactly that. A choice. Each person has the right to choose if they vaccinate themselves or not. What we don’t have the right to do is discriminate against those who choose not to vaccinate. This is their choice, and they deserve just as much freedom as people who are vaccinated. Especially as the vaccine does not prevent transmission. Perhaps the unvaccinated already have more freedom. They are already choosing to be free. They are choosing to stand in their power and not give up their bodily autonomy. They are choosing to live by their values. This is true freedom.  South Australian Chief Public Health Officer Nicola Spurrier published a video recently asking South Australians, “what are you waiting for?”
This question was directed at those who are yet to take the COVID-19 vaccine. “South Australians have done a great job at keeping our state safe from COVID-19. Now it’s time to get vaccinated, because here are the facts.” “COVID-19 vaccines have been tested, reviewed and approved in exactly the same way as all other vaccines. They’re close to 90% effective in reducing symptoms and preventing hospitalisation and death. Vaccines do not have late onset side effects and COVID vaccines are no different.” Let’s fact check the first statement. “COVID-19 vaccines have been tested, reviewed and approved in exactly the same way as all other vaccines.” According to the John Hopkins University of Medicine, “a typical vaccine development timeline takes 5 to 10 years, and sometimes longer, to assess whether the vaccine is safe and efficacious in clinical trials, complete the regulatory approval processes, and manufacture sufficient quantity of vaccine doses for widespread distribution”. It is true that this process has been sped up somewhat by people and organisations investing more money than usual in the development process, which enables more people to do more work and use more resources. The clinical trial phases are occurring at the same time, when the phases normally happen one after the other. It’s also easier for scientists to assess whether the vaccines are working due to the large number of COVID-19 cases worldwide, and more people have been willing to take part in clinical trials. Scientists worked out the virus’s genetic sequence early on in the pandemic, and they shared this information with other scientists. Companies also manufactured the vaccines prior to the clinical trials finishing. The John Hopkins University of Medicine explains that the “Phase 3 trials may take six to nine months to allow early assessment of safety and efficacy, particularly if conducted in areas with a high risk of infection, but with follow-up continuing for two years or more to assess long-term safety and efficacy”. According to the Australian Public Assessment Report, “from the perspective of vaccine efficacy, a 2 month median follow up is considered as the shortest follow up period to achieve some confidence that any protection against COVID-19 is likely to be more than short lived. The duration of protection is not yet known and is to be assessed in the ongoing trial”. The Phase 3 clinical trials were not conducted over 6-9 months, which is considered to be an accelerated time period. They were completed over a 2 month period. Furthermore, the Australian Public Assessment Report clearly states that the longer term safety is “unknown”. One thing we can’t speed up is time. According to ClinicalTrials.gov, the estimated study completion date for the Pfizer vaccine is May 2023, whilst the estimated study completion date for the AstraZeneca vaccine is February 2023. That’s right. The vaccines are still considered to be in the clinical trial phase. Professor Spurrier, the COVID-19 vaccines have NOT been “tested, reviewed and approved in exactly” the same way as all other vaccines. VERDICT – FASLE Let’s fact check the next statement. “They’re close to 90% effective in reducing symptoms and preventing hospitalisation and death.” Pfizer’s clinical trials boasted an efficacy of 95%, whilst Moderna was 94% and AstraZeneca was 67%. However, if we look a little closer, this is measuring relative risk reduction. A more accurate measure is absolute risk reduction. A study published in the Lancet shows that the actual efficacy is “1·3% for the AstraZeneca-Oxford, 1·2% for the Moderna-NIH… and 0·84% for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines”. A study conducted in Qatar and published in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that “BNT162b2-induced protection against SARS-COV-2 infection appeared to wane rapidly following its peak after the second dose”. “Estimated BNT162b2 effectiveness against any SARS-CoV-2 infection was negligible in the first 2 weeks after the first dose. It increased to 36.8%... in the third week after the first dose and reached its peak at 77.5%... in the first month after the second dose.” “Effectiveness declined gradually thereafter, with the decline accelerating after the fourth month to reach approximately 20% in months 5 through 7 after the second dose. Effectiveness against symptomatic infection was higher than effectiveness against asymptomatic infection but waned similarly. Variant-specific effectiveness waned in the same pattern.” Another study from Israel, also published in the New England Journal of Medicine, stated that “BNT162b2-induced protection against SARS-COV-2 infection appeared to wane rapidly following its peak after the second dose, but protection against hospitalization and death persisted at a robust level for 6 months after the second dose”. The most damning study of all is a preprint study that was just released, which concluded that “these data demonstrate a substantial waning of antibody responses and T cell immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, at 6 months following the second immunization with the BNT162b2 vaccine. Notably, a significant proportion of vaccinees have neutralizing titers below the detection limit.” After six months, antibodies were no longer detectable. Furthermore, a reduction in severe illness, hospitalisation and death was never measured in the initial clinical trials, as highlighted by the Lancet. “These considerations on efficacy and effectiveness are based on studies measuring prevention of mild to moderate COVID-19 infection; they were not designed to conclude on prevention of hospitalisation, severe disease, or death, or on prevention of infection and transmission potential.” Pfizer’s Six Month Safety and Efficacy Data highlights something even more disturbing. The clinical trials show a 0.13% reduction in severe illness, a reduction in hospitalisation was never measured, and the reduction in death was 0.002%, which is not statistically significant. Currently in Singapore, with 84% of the population fully vaccinated, 58% of cases in hospital, 39% on oxygen supplementation, and 41% in ICU are fully vaccinated. The death rate per capita has now surpassed the world average for the first time. To say that the vaccine is “90% effective in reducing symptoms and preventing hospitalisation and death” is factually incorrect. VERDICT – FALSE Finally, let’s fact check the final statement. “Vaccines do not have late onset side effects and COVID vaccines are no different”. There were no reports of myocarditis during the initial clinical trials, yet around the world, many people, especially young males, are suffering from myocarditis and pericarditis. According to the TGA’s Weekly Safety Report, “our analysis of Australian data indicates there is a higher-than-expected number of cases of myocarditis in vaccinated compared to unvaccinated individuals for Comirnaty (Pfizer)”. There have been 1,008 cases of suspected myocarditis or pericarditis so far. The youngest case reported was in a 12 year old, who has absolutely no risk of severe illness or death from COVID-19. The cells of the heart do not regenerate, putting additional stress on the heart over a person’s lifetime, which may have severe or potentially fatal long-term consequences. Dr J. Bart Classen published a study examining the risk of prion disease from RNA-based vaccines. Wikipedia describes prion disease in the following way. “Prions are misfolded proteins with the ability to transmit their misfolded shape onto normal variants of the same protein. They characterise several fatal and transmissible neurodegenerative diseases in humans and many other animals.” Dr Classen explains that the “concern is raised that the RNA based COVID vaccines have the potential to cause more disease than the epidemic of COVID-19”. “This paper focuses on a novel potential adverse event mechanism causing prion disease which could be even more common and debilitating than the viral infection the vaccine is designed to prevent. While this paper focuses on one potential adverse event there are multiple other potential fatal adverse events as discussed below.” “Autoimmunity and the opposing condition, metabolic syndrome, are well known adverse events caused by vaccines. COVID-19 infections are associated with the induction of autoantibodies and autoimmune disease making it more than plausible a vaccine could do the same.” “Others working in the field have published additional support that COVID-19 vaccines could potentially induce prion disease. Authors found prion related sequences in the COVID-19 spike protein which were not found in related coronaviruses.” Prion disease is an often fatal neurodegenerative disease. It is critical that this possibility is ruled out prior to rolling out a vaccine. If this does indeed occur, for many it will simply be too late. Autoimmune disease can take many years to develop, and there are still question marks on the long term safety during pregnancy and on fertility. Vaccines have been proven to have late-onset side effects. VERDICT – FALSE As we can clearly see, Professor Spurrier has made a number of claims that either require further investigation, or can simply be refuted. It is reckless, irresponsible and negligent as the South Australian Chief Public Health Officer to make such claims. This type of behaviour needs to cease immediately, along with the roll out of the vaccine. Professor Spurrier, we demand an immediate retraction of these statements, and recommend that you resign as the South Australian Chief Public Health Officer effective immediately. By Dr Judy Wilyman
It is the ‘education’ and regulation of doctors that is preventing doctors from practising medicine with integrity in 2020-21. The Government Therapeutic Goods Administrator (TGA) of Drugs/Vaccines in Australia states that COVID19 vaccines are:
The removal of both scientific evidence and balanced discussion of vaccines in the media has occurred over decades, and we now have a situation where labels and biased information are being used to manipulate your thinking about these drugs. Drugs that are being mandated for HEALTHY people in genetically diverse populations. This fraudulent promotion of a medical intervention was cemented in 2009 when a government board was set up in Australia to regulate doctors on the “accepted” science for vaccine promotion. This Federal government agency is called the Australian Health Practitioners Regulatory Authority (AHPRA) and it is both a government agency and an Australian incorporated business (ABN 78 685 433 429). In other words, this board controls the knowledge doctors can promote on vaccines and it influences the design and promotion of government vaccination policies. This board has the power to de-regulate doctors and health professionals who make a different risk assessment of vaccines to that provided by this government regulatory board. Medication for healthy people affects their quality of life and it is doctors who are trained to assess the medical literature for risks and benefits. The AHPRA board has a serious conflict of interest in the regulation of doctors’ knowledge on vaccines, and doctors cannot speak the truth to power if they can lose their livelihoods for doing so. The risks of vaccines associated with our genetics are now being described as "antivaccination material" and doctors are threatened with de-registration by AHPRA for providing this medical literature to their patients. This includes contraindications to vaccines that have been practiced for 40+ years but have now been arbitrarily removed. Hence, doctors are now violating the first principle of medicine because they cannot promote their patients best interest first. That is, drugs/vaccines must be given to individuals with advice regarding their own individual circumstances and genetics. This is a key factor in health outcomes with respect to drugs and when this is violated doctors are no longer promoting health in the community. They are promoting sickness and death because many illnesses are linked to our family history and genetics. The Australian government has now indemnified doctors to give these experimental injections to their patients - injections that are documented to cause serious known and unknown harm in patients. Taxpayers (we) will be paying for our doctors to inflict this harm (and death) on patients without fully informed consent due to government mandates that remove our jobs and right to travel if we refuse. Over the last few decades doctors have been “educated” in pharma-funded medical schools with industry-funded science. They are taught that anyone who discusses the ingredients of vaccines (drugs) or the serious risks of vaccines, is an “antivaxxer” and a “conspiracy theorist”. This same opinion is provided to the public in the corporate-sponsored mainstream media to denigrate any scientific discussion of the risks of these drugs that are given to healthy people. Mainstream media has always been a tool to manipulate public behaviour and when the US Congress removed liability from pharmaceutical companies for any harm caused by any drug labelled a “vaccine” in 1986 (because they were paying millions of dollars in compensation for deaths and injuries), this enabled big pharma to minimise the risks of these drugs and to exaggerate the benefits (“life-saving products”) – without providing evidence for these claims. In 2021 this dismissive ridicule by authorities reached a new low when the Western Australian Premier, Mark McGowan, disrespectfully told ~5,000 WA parents and grandparents at a rally opposing mandatory jabs for jobs, to “Grow a brain” and he stated that “this is about medicine and saving lives”. This statement by this Premier is simply untrue when you ignore the genetics of the population. High school science students can tell the Premier that a mandatory drug/vaccine, in a genetically diverse population, will cause death and sickness in a significant proportion of the population. Mark McGowan should be removed from his role as Premier for his contempt for the people he serves and for putting the public's lives are risk with false health information. Politicians, media, and doctors are using labels to convey a ‘belief’ about vaccines and to stigmatise critical thinking, and this is done without providing any supportive evidence for the implied meanings the words are given. This strategy has been used to support the expansion of national vaccination programs from 1986 – 2021. Since 1986 ‘beliefs’ that are not evidence-based have been promoted by the media, politicians and doctors by using the following words to promote public health policy: Vaccines - drugs that have ‘rare’ side-effects and are ‘necessary to control infectious diseases.’ Both claims are untrue. Infectious diseases – re-labelled as ‘vaccine-preventable diseases’ since 1986 to imply that they can be prevented with a vaccine. Vaccination programs – falsely labelled as ‘immunisation programs.’ It is known that many vaccinated people do not get immunity after a vaccine is given and they still get the disease. Catch-Up Schedules – They are not catch-up schedules because most older Australians did not have these vaccines and were never at risk from these diseases. Antivaxxer – a derogatory term used to describe an educated parent/professional that discusses the risk-benefit analysis of vaccines or ingredients of vaccines. Knowledge of these criteria are necessary to promote ‘healthy’ outcomes from vaccines, yet they are ridiculed. Conspiracy Theory – derogatory term used to dismiss the serious conflicts of interest in every aspect of global health policy designed by the WHO/GAVI alliance and national vaccination policies designed by governments. This is a political situation, and it is the influence of corporate money in the political and economic decisions of governments that has led to doctors, governments and the media collaborating to commit a serious crime against their populations by falsely advertising an experimental genetic technology as a ‘vaccine’. People, including health professionals, are walking into their own deaths and illnesses, due to the false and misleading health information that is being provided by the powerful medical-industry complex to politicians. This corporate health model has monopolised doctors, industry-funded research institutions, politicians, and the mainstream media to educate the public with ignorance about the risks of vaccines. A situation described as agnotology in the academic literature and if doctors were not gagged by AHPRA (their government/corporate regulatory board) it would not have been possible to violate their medical ethics and commit this crime against humanity that will destroy the genetic fabric of society.  No wonder the country is in turmoil with premiers like Mark McGowan running our states and territories.
The WA Premier suggested recently that protestors should “grow a brain”. He even asked, “What are they protesting about?” Surely, he can’t be serious, can he? Mr McGowan continued by saying that “we’re not in lockdown. We’re in a free community, free society. I think they’re just out there because they’re trying to cause trouble, they’re the sort of people who’d like to cause trouble.” Ask the residents of New South Wales and Victoria if they’re in a “free society”. This just goes to show how delusional Mr McGowan really is. Unlike our Prime Minister and state premiers, the rest of the country is united and many people realise that we are all in this together. The residents of WA are hurting now for those in other states. Many have family and friends that have suffered through some of the longest lockdowns in the world. People are protesting against closed state borders that have prevented them from seeing loved ones. People are protesting for those who have lost jobs, businesses and income. People are protesting for those who are suffering from mental health issues as a result of the restrictive measures. And people are protesting for Australian citizens stranded overseas who have been forgotten about by their government. These are just a few of the reasons why people are protesting. “The alternative is when or if we get outbreaks, more people will get sick, and more people die, and our hospitals have more and more pressure applied… If you’re a health professional, you should understand the value of being vaccinated”, said Mr McGowan. Is this why many health professionals are walking off the job? They can see that the vaccine is neither safe or effective. They would prefer to give up their careers rather than take an experimental product. The Western Australian government recently announced that “100 per cent of healthcare workers and health support workers who worked in public and private hospitals and public health service facilities would be fully vaccinated”. Many health care workers are opposed to the vaccine for a variety of reasons. The long-term safety and duration of protection is unknown, vaccine efficacy against asymptomatic infection and viral transmission has not yet been addressed, and a correlate of protection has yet to be established. This is according to the TGA’s Australian Public Assessment Report. Furthermore, the Pfizer Six Month Safety and Efficacy Data showed a 0.13% reduction in severe illness, a reduction in hospitalisation was not measured, and a reported 0.002% reduction in death is not statistically significant. Data out of some of the most highly vaccinated countries in the world isn’t any better. At the time of writing, 82% of the population in Singapore is fully vaccinated. However, the case numbers, severe illness, hospitalisations and death continue to rise. Singapore is experiencing record case numbers, with a 7-day average of 1,697 cases. At the peak of the first wave in April 2020, the highest case number recorded was 1,426. In 2020, Singapore recorded 29 COVID-19 deaths. In 2021, that number is 56. 55% of those in hospital, 44% of those requiring oxygen supplementation and 44% of those in ICU are fully vaccinated. In the UK, 50% of the cases of the Delta variant were in the unvaccinated for those under the age of 50, whilst only 9% of the cases were unvaccinated for those 50 years and older. In terms of deaths, 65% were unvaccinated under 50, whilst only 25% of those 50 years and older who passed away were unvaccinated. Given the rushed nature of this vaccine, and the fact that it is still in the clinical trial phase with no long-term safety data, one can understand why people, particularly health care workers, refuse to take the vaccine. Further evidence was released recently regarding viral transmission. A preprint study found that there was “no significant difference in cycle threshold values between vaccinated and unvaccinated, asymptomatic and symptomatic groups infected with SARS-CoV-2 Delta”, indicating that the viral loads are the same. Essentially, this means that vaccinated people are just as likely as unvaccinated people to transmit the virus. “Our study is consistent with other recent reports showing similar viral loads among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in settings with transmission of the Delta variant.” “In a Wisconsin study, Ct-values were similar and culture positivity was not different in a subset of analyses between 11 vaccinated and 24 unvaccinated cases. In both Massachusetts and Singapore, individuals with vaccination breakthroughs caused by the Delta variant had similar Ct-values as unvaccinated individuals.” “A substantial proportion of asymptomatic, fully vaccinated individuals in our study had low Ct-values, indicative of high viral loads.” “Given that low Ct-values are indicative of high levels of virus, culture positivity, and increased transmission, our detection of low Ct-values in asymptomatic, fully vaccinated individuals is consistent with the potential for transmission from breakthrough infections prior to any emergence of symptoms.” Vaccine mandates are of no benefit, they are unconstitutional and they are immoral. They are wrong in every single way. This is why people are protesting. They are protesting against tyranny and they are fighting for freedom. Everyone has the right to choose what they put into their body, and the body of their children. Vaccine mandates remove this right, and they have no place in Australia. Not now. Not ever.  Prime Minister Scott Morrison has consistently stated that the government will not “seek to impose” mandatory vaccinations.
“We are not seeking to mandate vaccines. That is not the government’s policy, that is not how Australia has successfully run vaccination programs in the past.” “I wouldn’t want it suggested that either the Federal Government or the state and territory governments are seeking to impose a mandatory process on this vaccination program for Australians. We have been very clear about that.” However, the states and territories have not heeded this advice. In fact, the National Cabinet, which includes the Prime Minister, began the process of mandatory vaccination when they agreed to mandate the vaccine for residential aged care and hotel quarantine workers. Following this, the NSW government decided to mandate the vaccine for teachers and staff, with those who choose not to receive the vaccine by November 8 being put on notice that they will be stood aside. In Tasmania, Acting Premier Jeremy Rockliff announced that vaccines will be mandatory for all health care workers from October 31. This includes workers in both the public and private sectors. Public Health Director Mark Veitch claimed that health care workers are “dealing with some of the more vulnerable, ill, older people in the community and they have a duty of care to protect those people from infection from themselves”. The vaccine does not prevent transmission, but more on this later. Most recently, the Victorian government mandated the vaccine for construction workers, giving workers one week to receive their first dose. However, this has resulted in protests against the government and the CFMEU. Construction workers are quite rightly angry, as many will lose their jobs and their incomes should they choose not to take the vaccine. This not only affects them, but their entire family as well. The government then went a step further by announcing a mandate for health care workers in Victoria as well. Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews hypocritically said that “we'll do whatever we can to support those people”. Mr Andrews, there is only one way to support these people, and that is by NOT mandating a vaccine that is neither safe or effective. There are many reasons why people are choosing not to take the vaccine. Firstly, according to the Department of Health, the overall survival rate in Australia at the time of writing is 98.66%. For those under the age of 60, the survival rate is 99.91%. Most of the mandates apply to those under the age of 60, who are at minimal risk of dying from COVID-19. Secondly, there is no long term safety data. The TGA’s Weekly Safety Report states that there have been 59,199 adverse events reported so far. There have only been 87,101 cases in total, with the large majority of the cases being asymptomatic or mild. There have been a number of reports of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, Guillain-Barre syndrome, immune thrombocytopenia, and myocarditis and pericarditis. Nine people have passed away following the AstraZeneca vaccine out of 535 deaths reported shortly after receiving the vaccine. Thirdly, the vaccines are completely ineffective. Despite a reported 95% efficacy for Pfizer and 67% for AstraZeneca, the actual efficacy when measuring absolute risk reduction is 0.84% for Pfizer and 1.3% for AstraZeneca. A reduction in severe illness, hospitalisation and death was never measured in the initial clinical trials. The Six Month Safety and Efficacy Data from Pfizer shows that the vaccine reduced severe illness by 0.13%, a reduction in hospitalisation was never measured, and death was reduced by 0.002%, which is not statistically significant. Even Pfizer’s own clinical trial data shows that the vaccine is ineffective. Singapore is one of the most vaccinated countries in the world, with 82% of the entire population fully vaccinated. Despite this, case numbers continue to rise. At the time of writing, 909 cases were hospitalised, with 524 of those fully vaccinated (58%). 128 cases require oxygen supplementation, with 65 fully vaccinated (51%). Of the 18 people currently in ICU, 9 are fully vaccinated (50%). There have been more COVID-19 deaths in 2021 than during the entire 2020 year. Israel is another country where things are only getting worse. Despite their high vaccination rate, and the fact that booster shots have been administered to approximately half of the eligible population, Israel is now reporting the highest case numbers per million people out of any country in the world. Thankfully, many people can interpret this data for what it actually is. Fourthly, the vaccine does not stop transmission. Studies conducted in Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Singapore and Vietnam all showed that viral loads in the vaccinated were as high, and in some cases higher, than those in the unvaccinated. According to the Wisconsin study, “vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant… Our results, while preliminary, suggest that if vaccinated individuals become infected with the delta variant, they may be sources of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to others.” The Vietnam study was even more damning, showing that “viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020”. Another paper by Dr Nina Pierpont shows that there is “excellent scientific research papers published or posted in August 2021 (which) clearly demonstrate that current vaccines do not prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2.” This alone should end all vaccine mandates immediately. Finally, people have the right to choose what they put into their own body. This is called medical freedom, and it is a basic human right. The Australian Immunisation Handbook states that for consent to be legally valid, “it must be given voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion or manipulation”. Mandating vaccines renders informed consent legally invalid, as mandates pressure, coerce and manipulate people into taking a vaccine that they would not have otherwise taken. These are only some of the many reasons why people are choosing not to take the vaccine. In a free society, we have the right to choose. We have the right to choose if we take the vaccine, or if we don’t take the vaccine. The government, federal or state, does not have the right to make this decision for us. We are seeing more and more people stand up every day in the fight for freedom. Many of these people have taken the vaccine, but they stand against coercion, discrimination and segregation. It’s time to stand up, unite as one, and end all vaccine mandates now.  New South Wales Premier Gladys Berejiklian recently declared that she does not want to be “anywhere with someone who’s not vaccinated”.
She continued by saying that it’s “just my personal choice and people will make those personal choices”. This follows her previous comments that she “wouldn’t want to be in the room with lots of people who aren’t vaccinated” and that she hopes that “all of our colleagues (parliamentarians) are vaccinated”. These sound like comments from a child, not the leader of New South Wales. These comments are divisive and discriminatory, and they have no place in Australian society. Let’s take a look at the why. A Wisconsin study found “no difference in viral loads when comparing unvaccinated individuals to those who have vaccine “breakthrough” infections. Furthermore, individuals with vaccine breakthrough infections frequently test positive with viral loads consistent with the ability to shed infectious viruses… Our results, while preliminary, suggest that if vaccinated individuals become infected with the delta variant, they may be sources of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to others.” Meanwhile, a Singapore study showed that “PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values were similar between both vaccinated and unvaccinated groups at diagnosis, but viral loads decreased faster in vaccinated individuals”. A CDC study found that “real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) cycle threshold (Ct) values in specimens from 127 vaccinated persons with breakthrough cases were similar to those from 84 persons who were unvaccinated, not fully vaccinated, or whose vaccination status was unknown”. And finally, a Vietnam study demonstrated that “viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020… Breakthrough Delta variant infections are associated with high viral loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies, explaining the transmission between the vaccinated people.” Ms Berejiklian, if you can still catch COVID-19 and pass it onto others when you are fully vaccinated, how are you protecting yourself by not being “anywhere with someone who’s not vaccinated”? It is time you stop acting like a tyrant and start acting like a leader. Leaders unite people and bring communities together. Your comments are abhorrent and demand an immediate apology. However, Ms Berejiklian didn’t finish there. “I just want to make this point very clear: if people want to enjoy the things we have missed such as a meal or any other issue, or any other venue, they’re going to have to be vaccinated.” “We have to accept, especially between 70-80 per cent, that for any given time… it’s in the interests of the business venue or the facility not to have an outbreak. That’s why it’s in the businesses’ interest to prevent that from happening, to make sure they don’t allow people coming in who aren't vaccinated, because that will impact their business continuity.” “Many people may still not feel safe at that stage, knowing that there's still a high rate of unvaccinated adults.” Dr Nina Pierpont, who has a medical degree from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and a PhD from Princeton University, published an excellent paper titled ‘Covid-19 Vaccine Mandates Are Now Pointless: Covid-19 vaccines do not keep people from catching the prevailing Delta variant and passing it to others’. In her article, Dr Pierpont stated that there is “excellent scientific research papers published or posted in August 2021 (which) clearly demonstrate that current vaccines do not prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2.” “On the way to herd immunity, there is an assumption that people who are immunized can form safe clusters or groups within which no one is carrying or transmitting the virus… Unfortunately, this last assumption is no longer true under the new variant of SARS-CoV-2, Delta (B.1.617.2), which now accounts for essentially all cases worldwide.” “From its origin in India, Delta has soared to nearly complete domination of COVID-19 viral strains everywhere in a matter of months, because it spreads so easily and infects both vaccinated and unvaccinated people.” Dr Pierpont explains that “viral loads are much higher in people infected with Delta than they were in people infected with Alpha” and that “viral loads with Delta are equally high whether the person has been vaccinated or not.” However, the following statements by Dr Pierpont are the most damning. “Due to evolution of the virus itself, all the currently licensed vaccines (all based on the original Wuhan strain spike protein sequence) have lost their ability to accomplish vaccine purpose… To keep people from carrying the infection and transmitting it to others.” “Vaccine mandates are thus stripped of their justification, since to vaccinate an individual no longer stops or even slows his ability to acquire and transmit the virus to others.” Dr Pierpont concludes that “given all the above evidence, mandating others to take a vaccine is a potentially harmful, damaging act”. The NSW government, under Gladys Berejiklian’s leadership, not only refuse to follow the evidence, but are now creating a two-tier society of the good and the bad, the superior and inferior, the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. Abandoning liberty and democracy for tyranny and fear will only further divide the state and the nation. Separating Australians into two distinct classes of people has no place in our society, and it simply will not be tolerated. Ms Berejiklian, it’s time for you to stand down as Premier of New South Wales. The state and the country deserves better.  NSW Health Minister Brad Hazzard is at it again. This time he has slammed people who choose not to receive the vaccine as being “selfish or self-entitled”.
In a recent press conference, Mr Hazzard said, “So the short answer is, as I said earlier: get out and get vaccinated. Don’t be so selfish or self-entitled to think you’re different from the rest of us. You’re not.” “Go and get vaccinated and give the entire community, particularly frontline medical staff, a fair go.” By suggesting that people are selfish or self-entitled, perhaps Mr Hazzard is referring to those people who are well-researched, critically think, have justified reservations or simply want to maintain their health naturally. This isn’t the first time Mr Hazzard has labelled sections of the community as selfish. In February, he had this to say. “This is really not the time to be precious or selfish with your own views. It’s a case of not what health workers can do for you and your community can do for you now, but it’s what you can do for health workers and for your community. Get vaccinated!” When Mr Hazzard refers to giving the entire community a “fair go”, what exactly is he referring to? It is now common knowledge that the vaccine does not prevent transmission. The vaccinated can transmit the virus just as much as the unvaccinated, and in some cases, more so. A study in Wisconsin claimed that “we find no difference in viral loads when comparing unvaccinated individuals to those who have vaccine “breakthrough” infections. Furthermore, individuals with vaccine breakthrough infections frequently test positive with viral loads consistent with the ability to shed infectious viruses.” “Our results, while preliminary, suggest that if vaccinated individuals become infected with the delta variant, they may be sources of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to others.” Another study conducted in Singapore showed that “PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values were similar between both vaccinated and unvaccinated groups at diagnosis, but viral loads decreased faster in vaccinated individuals”. A CDC study in Massachusetts showed that “real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) cycle threshold (Ct) values in specimens from 127 vaccinated persons with breakthrough cases were similar to those from 84 persons who were unvaccinated, not fully vaccinated, or whose vaccination status was unknown”. Finally, and most damning, was a study conducted in Vietnam that demonstrated that “viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020”. “Breakthrough Delta variant infections are associated with high viral loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies, explaining the transmission between the vaccinated people.” The Australian Public Assessment Report even states that “vaccine efficacy against asymptomatic infection and viral transmission” has not yet been addressed. Mr Hazzard, if the vaccinated can spread the virus as much, if not more, than the unvaccinated, how are the unvaccinated being “selfish and self-entitled”? How exactly are vaccinated protecting their community when they can transmit the virus? What about severe illness, hospitalisation and death? The Singapore study found that the “odds of severe COVID-19 requiring oxygen supplementation was significantly lower following vaccination”. However, breakthrough infections occurred in a significantly older age, putting those at greater risk. The study also concluded that “early, robust boosting of anti-spike protein antibodies was observed in vaccinated patients, however, these titers were significantly lower against B.1.617.2 (Delta) as compared with the wildtype vaccine strain”. In the vaccine clinical trials, a reduction in severe illness, hospitalisation and death was never measured. What was measured was a reduction in mild to moderate disease based on a positive PCR test and one or more symptoms of COVID-19. The Six Month Safety and Efficacy data from Pfizer showed no statistical significance in a reduction in death. Out of 43,847 participants, there was one less death due to COVID-19 in the vaccine group compared to the placebo group. This is a reduction of 0.002%, which is not statistically significant. With regards to a reduction in severe illness, 1 participant out of 22,505 people was diagnosed with severe COVID-19 in the vaccine group (0.0044%), whilst 30 participants were diagnosed with severe COVID-19 out of 22,435 in the placebo group (0.13%). The overall reduction in severe illness is therefore 0.13%. This is hardly a meaningful reduction in severe illness. Peter Doshi commented on these findings in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), stating that the “number of hospital admissions is not reported so we don’t know which, if any, of these patients were ill enough to require hospital treatment”. In Moderna’s clinical trial, 21 out of 30 severe COVID-19 cases were not admitted to hospital. The vaccine is therefore even less effective at preventing hospitalisations. America’s Frontline Doctors published a report showing that “among the 104 countries which offer no demonstrable COVID vaccination programs, on 08/16/21, their COVID fatality rates averaged an unexpectedly lower 690 deaths per million”. “Among the 82 countries which offer vaccination programs, on 08/16/21, their COVID fatality rates averaged 828 deaths per million which is counterintuitively higher than the COVID fatality rate for unvaccinated countries.” “In the 82 countries which offer vaccination programs, not only was the average COVID fatality rate greater than in unvaccinated countries, but the number of deaths increased as the number or percentage of residents vaccinated increased.” Is it possible that the vaccine is actually causing an increase in not only cases, but an increase in deaths? And if there is any possibility of this occurring, why isn’t the vaccination program being halted immediately so the data can be accurately assessed? Mr Hazzard, is it “selfish” to do your research or look at the data for more information? Is it being “self-entitled” to not want to inject yourself with a product currently in the clinical trial stage with no long-term safety data? Is it being “different” when someone critically thinks and doesn’t follow the narrative? Mr Hazzard, it is you who is being selfish for pressuring and coercing people into taking an experimental vaccine so that they can go to work, go to school, earn an income, attend events and travel for work or to see family and friends. You should be ashamed of your behaviour and the way that you have conducted yourself as Health Minister of NSW. We all have the right to choose what we put in our bodies and the bodies of our children. It is not being selfish, it is being responsible. |
AuthorOur articles and rebuttal pieces are written by our writers on our volunteer team Archives
November 2021
Categories |
RSS Feed
Home
|
Truth Day
|
Connect
|
News
|
© Copyright 2020 Vaccine Choice Australia Privacy Policy