What You Need To Know About The ‘Vaccine’ Before You Take It

Please note, this is not intended as medical advice for you, I am not a doctor, but I am drawing your attention to the work of those who are doctors who are informed and have no financial or brand stake that would compromise their presentation of this assessment of the safety of this ‘vaccine’.

Here in the UK the vaccine has been hailed by our Primeminister as “our [only] means of escape”.  So, the major push is on at the moment to sell the vaccine to the population that has previously been “burned” with previous vaccination scandals where vaccines caused death and disability; this is also the case worldwide wherever vaccines have been used.  Now, I will let a group of doctors outline just what this ‘vaccine’ is – as they rightly explain, it is questionable whether it should be called a “vaccine” as it does not yet meet the minimum scientific criteria to be called one, it is still legally and formally ‘an experimental biological agent’ – their conclusions can be summarised in a few sentences:

Prohibited for the young (0-20).  There is no significant risk factor from the disease in this age group; risk from problems arising from the use of an unproven biological agent are far higher.

Discouraged for the healthy middle-aged (20-69) – your immune system is perfectly capable of dealing with it and you can manage it as you would any other disease if possible transmission to vulnerable relatives is an issue – receive treatment if necessary and quarantine until you are well.  There is no confirmed evidence that the vaccine will actually prevent transmission (one of the major problems with calling it a ‘vaccine’ which does prevent transmission) so its use as a preventative agent for the socially concerned is spurious.

Optional for the co-morbid (2.6+) and elderly (>70).  This would be a personal risk-benefit assessment in consultation with a medical professional.

  • ‘Co-morbid’ simply means an additional chronic or acute illness, e.g. diabetic, existing respiratory condition, kidney failure.

There is no evidence that vaccines should be racially prioritized, i.e. certain ethnic groups are more at risk from COVID (consider the Africa and India experience where the death-rate is a fraction of the rate in the West despite predictions of ‘meltdown’ in those places because of a lack of health infrastructure and overcrowding).

  • This is because of a concerted push by governments to present it as a matter of ‘racial justice’ that certain ethnic groups should get the vaccine first.  Black and brown people have historically been abused more by vaccine faults, eugenic experimentation and unofficial trials than any other group and have a strong antipathy towards vaccines.

If you have no time to read the full whitepaper, or to listen to a presentation, both of which are exceptional  resources summarising important issues surrounding the mismanagement and misinformation regarding COVID-19 more generally, here are a some juicy bits to suck on:

Strong vaccine advocates Dr. Offit and Dr. Hotez, who would be expected to be enthusiastic about these experimental vaccines, have not really endorsed these new experimental vaccines, because previous coronavirus vaccines have a long history of failure due to “antibody dependent enhancement.”  Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE), is when anti-COVID antibodies, created by a vaccine, instead of protecting the person, cause a more severe or lethal disease when the person is later exposed to SARS-CoV-2 in the wild.The vaccine amplifies the infection rather than preventing damage. It may only be seen after months or years of use in populations around the world. This paradoxical reaction has been seen in other vaccines and animal trials. One well-documented example is with the Dengue fever vaccine, which resulted in avoidable deaths…Despite over 50 years of active research, a Dengue vaccine still has not gained widespread approval [because of] ADE.

‘Science’, ‘Nature’, ‘Journal of Infectious Diseases’ and others, have already documented ADE, or vaccine-associated hypersensitivity (VAH) risks in relation to the development of experimental COVID-19 vaccines.

Placental inflammation resulting in stillbirths mid-pregnancy (second trimester) is seen with COVID-19 and with other similar coronaviruses. The way the experimental vaccines work [a non-replicating vector or strand of RNA], it is concerning that that deleterious effect on the placenta, which in the wild only lasts as long as the acute illness [because your immune system destroys it], would instead be lifelong [because your immune system does not remove it because it is a non-replicating vector].

In 1986, Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA). It provides immunity from liability  to all vaccine manufacturing companies…AstraZeneca this time round goes even further in acknowledging that this is an emergency situation and requested [and got] no liability from the EU. “This is a unique situation where we as a company simply cannot take the risk if in…four years the vaccine is showing side effects,” Ruud Dobber, a member of Astra’s senior executive team, told Reuters.

Two executives of AstraZeneca resigned in protest that the ADE and Placental Inflammation risks were not sufficiently considered for the vaccine to be even provisionally safe to market and petitioned the EU to deny certification at this point.

Both Dr Fauci and the Surgeon General of the US have publicly stated that this “vaccine” does not prevent transmission – that means masks, social distancing and any other measure deemed “for your safety” remain in force.  The idea that our life “will return to normal” if we take the vaccine, which is what is being pushed worldwide to get people to take an unproven, experimental biological agent with clear risk factors, is therefore duplicitous and false.

People who have taken the vaccine have now tested positive for COVID-19:  it is unknown whether they will always test positive but it provides an excellent way to inflate COVID-19 infection figures to provide further justification for restrictions on your freedom and liberty.

The only group for which the vaccine seems a rational choice is for the elderly, co-morbid.  Most deaths from COVID-19 have occurred in nursing homes amongst the frail elderly.  As such, they are the group to be prioritised.  It makes no sense to prioritise medical staff, police, military or civil workers who are in demographics with extremely low fatality rates.  It is even less rational to take the vaccine if it merely renders the carrier asymptomatic if they do get exposed – they would then be a more effective spreader to vulnerable groups if asymptomatic transmission is considered a real risk.  This was always a dubious claim which seems completely discredited if the ‘vaccine’ is being rolled out as it is now – they have refuted their own position.  For healthy people to take an unproven, experimental biological agent which may cause them to get more ill if they are exposed to the virus, is an issue of national security.  Consider the scenario where you have a severe pandemic because of a reaction to the vaccine leaving a shortage of medical staff, police, military and government functions.

Consider carefully the implications of those paragraphs in your choices – you may have an OK response to the vaccine but the vaccine causes a severe reaction to the real disease.  If you were severely ill with the disease and could not return to normal life, you could not claim for damages and worse still, if you died, your family would get no compensation other than what charity the government might push your way.  The vaccine does not prevent transmission, it merely renders you asymptomatic and makes you COVID-19 positive.  Unless you are in a high risk group, which are really the frail elderly or those of middle age with multiple serious co-morbidities (diabetes, kidney problems, respiratory conditions…this is where you need an honest doctor), there is no compelling case to take a vaccine.  It is not my word, it is the considered opinion of extremely well qualified, informed, senior doctors.

  • As one of the leading doctors stated, they were a “hero” when they were working in the ER (A&E for us Brits!) dealing with COVID patients, but now a “quack” for daring to challenge the false narrative surrounding the disease.

Now, this image shows the official  US CDC statistics for Infection Fatality Rates (so bear in mind these figures would be as inflated as much as they possibly could be to justify the COVID narrative):

COVID survival rates

Consider the rational implications of these survival rates – is it really worth decimating our way of life and causing preventable deaths (which are now occurring because of the cancellation of ‘routine’ primary care in surgeries and hospitals) through a range of far more severe conditions?  Around 60 million will die this year of a range of conditions and 6 million, i.e. around 10%, of those will be because of other respiratory diseases.  By the logic of this pandemic, our response should be 10× more severe for those deaths that have already happened than in response to COVID-19.

However, it gets worse than that!  As I mentioned at the beginning of the article, the vaccine has been hailed by our Primeminister as “our [only] means of escape”.  Now, if that really is the case, we would never escape from COVID restrictions on our liberty.  Already the vaccine master plan, seen as the exit door from lockdown, is threatening to unravel as “new virulent” strains are appearing (this is the major reason given for re-entering full lockdown countrywide rather than try and maintain some semblance of liberty by using a tiered system for different areas of the country).  When the developers of the UK Vaccine (also present in the US and elsewhere, Oxford-AstraZeneca) were challenged about the efficacy of the virus against the “new strains” they blustered a little bit and said “maybe the vaccine will need tweaking”.  Of course, this is a major public relations disaster in the making as it has been pushed as the only way to renormalize life and the current strategy is to ignore any possible problems with it and bury any news that could cause a lack of confidence in it.  Labour unions are already demanding “at home” rights in the name of “staying safe”,  the totally unaffordable furlough scheme has resurfaced and education of children is suspended for the same irrational reasons (children are unaffected by this virus and there has only been one possible case worldwide of transmission from a child to a teacher).

As I have previously written, if you get paid 75% of your wage via the government for staying home and doing no work, you will need some astonishing incentive to return to work in your “COVID-secure” environment to get that extra 25%.  Our governments, because they are not prepared to reconsider that their strategy was based on faulty science and the financial interests of large pharmaceuticals, are placing their populations at great risk with an unproven, experimental biological agent that could create a far worse pandemic in the coming years.  If, as is now being pushed, these “new” variants are said to require “further restrictive measures”, i.e. more restrictive than full lockdown, we are really looking at the preparation for the ‘Great [Economic] Reset‘ where capitalism is replaced with what is promised to be a more benevolent form of synarchic socialism as envisaged by the World Economic Forum where a few big multinational companies provide approved and equal resources for us all, we give up our rights to private property, enjoy a Universal Basic Income and inequality is swept away – at the cost of individual choice in the name of the “common good” but look at what you get in return, you are “safe” with a lifelong requirement to take various vaccines.  Should the wheels come off the vaccine train, State socialism is the only option left, which for the conspiracy theorists among us, is what was planned all along.

 

One thought on “What You Need To Know About The ‘Vaccine’ Before You Take It

  1. To make the point:
    “Sir Patrick said he expected the vaccines would reduce transmission of the virus but that “we shouldn’t go mad” as jabs are rolled out because a risk would remain. Just because you’ve been vaccinated doesn’t mean you can’t catch this and pass it on, it means you’re protected against severe disease,” he added.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55681861

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.