SA-Best Party member Frank Pangallo has called for those who refuse the COVID-19 vaccine to have what they do in the community “controlled and restricted”.
Mr Pangallo said that “while people might still have a choice whether or not to get vaccinated, what they can do in the community will need to be controlled and restricted”.
“There would need to be a requirement incorporated with QR code information that if you want to travel on public transport, airlines, enter venues, shopping malls, restaurants and cafes, you will need to show you have been vaccinated… It might also have to apply for workplaces.”
Mr Pangallo is advocating for the introduction of a ‘vaxport’, which is essentially a vaccine passport to participate within society. He also claimed that Australia is on the “cusp of a health and economic catastrophe”. This is fear mongering at its finest.
Other countries are currently trying to implement similar measures. French President Emmanuel Macron is trying to make proof of vaccination or immunity from a COVID-19 infection mandatory in order to “enter cafes, restaurants and a range of other venues” such as museums, galleries and cinemas.
However, Mr Macron was forced to walk back some of the proposed measures due to severe backlash from industries and the public. This is before the measures have even been implemented.
In the UK, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has announced that proof of vaccination will be required to “enter nightclubs and other crowded venues” from the end of September. Again, this has been met with protests from an angry public who are marching for freedom of choice and the right to bodily integrity.
In Greece, thousands of people protested in Athens against mandatory vaccination. Cardiologist Faidon Vovolis said that “every person has the right to choose… We're choosing that the government does not choose for us.” Mr Vovolis also questioned the scientific research around masks and vaccines.
The key point here is that each individual has the right to choose and should not be punished for this choice. Any form of punishment would be considered coercion, and no one should be coerced into taking a vaccine against their will.
In 2021, at the time of writing, there have been six deaths in Australia related to COVID-19, according to the Department of Health. During the same period, there have been four deaths following vaccination, according to the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). The TGA’s COVID-19 vaccine weekly safety report states that “four were confirmed and three were deemed probable TTS (thrombocytopenia syndrome)” following the AstraZeneca vaccine.
There have 9,149,817 doses administered of the COVID-19 vaccine, with 39,077 adverse events reported at a reporting rate of 0.43%.
To date, there have been 32,129 cases of COVID-19 with 915 deaths. The chance of an individual testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 is 0.13%, whilst the chance of someone dying from COVID-19 is 0.0036%.
The chance of having an adverse event to the vaccine is nearly four times greater than the chance of testing positive to SARS-CoV-2, and nearly 120 times greater than dying from COVID-19. No wonder people are hesitant to take the vaccine.
Furthermore, the TGA has granted the Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines provisional approval. They are not currently fully approved products. The clinical trials for both of the vaccines are not due for completion until 2023.
The Minister for Health Greg Hunt declared in February that the “world is engaged in the largest clinical trial, the largest global vaccination trial ever”.
Perhaps we should ask Mr Pangallo if he would knowingly participate in a vaccine trial.
The Australian Public Assessment Report for the Pfizer vaccine states that the “longer term safety and… duration of vaccine protection” is unknown. What if the vaccine is deemed to be unsafe long term? What will the side effects be? There simply hasn’t been enough time to monitor long-term safety, which typically takes 3-4 years.
The Australian Public Assessment Report states that there are other limitations with the submitted data and that the following questions have not yet been addressed:
Mr Pangallo, how can you say that people should be prevented from participating in society by refusing an experimental vaccine with no long-term safety data?
Will you be held responsible should people suffer from severe adverse events or die?
In the US, nearly 11,000 deaths have been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) following vaccination, along with over 460,000 adverse events. More deaths have been reported in six months for the COVID-19 vaccine than for all other vaccines in the last 30 years. What’s more, only 1-10% of adverse events are typically reported to VAERS.
In the UK, more than 1,400 deaths have been reported to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme, whilst in Europe, over 18,000 deaths have been recorded with EudraVigilence. These numbers are frightening whichever way you look at them. Surely the number of deaths alone should be enough to cause a complete halt to the vaccine roll out.
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”. Allowing only those who are vaccinated to travel on public transport, airlines, enter venues, shopping malls, restaurants, cafes and workplaces is pressuring, coercing and manipulating people into taking the vaccine.
Mr Pangallo is promoting discrimination against those who choose not to take the vaccine.
One of our basic human rights is bodily integrity. People are responsible for their own health care decisions, not the government. No government has the right to segregate or discriminate against those who choose not to take a vaccine, especially one with so many questions that have yet to be answered.
Mr Pangallo is creating unnecessary fear and alarmism. He is promoting discrimination and segregation, and he is creating a division within society amongst the ‘vaxxed’ and the ‘unvaxxed’.
We need our leaders to stand up and take charge, and not succumb to fear mongering. We need our doctors and scientists to show us the real science, rather than promote a product that is creating unimaginable damage throughout the world.
We need everyone to stand up and unite as one. We need to protect our freedom of choice, especially our right to medical freedom.
Where there is risk, there must be choice.
Our articles and rebuttal pieces are written by our writers on our volunteer team