Everyone knows how stringent vehicle safety regulations are, and that any report of a malfunction in a car manufacturer's model can initiate a world-wide recall. Any such occurrence means significant damage to their bottom line and their reputation in a lucrative market. So their internal checks and measures must obviously go above and beyond.
Similarly, cyber security providers must ensure the highest level of security at all times, and protecting the private data of its users is one of the most critical functions in business and government today. An entire industry has emerged from this, which specialises in ISO accreditation, penetration testing and complete disaster recovery processes, including regular testing and independent auditing for compliance.
Safety is at the core of these. In fact, it is the driver of everything else in the entire process. And when things go wrong, liability doesn't end with compensation for damage caused, but can include prosecution and even personal liability for Directors.
In the corporate world of cyber security, police checks are essential and breaches of security and breaks from policy are treated seriously, because no person or business is going to willingly place their safety in the hands of corrupt criminals.
Living in the western world of bureaucracy, red tape designed to protect us from corruption, and failures in due diligence, is it really such a stretch to question the speed with which our department of health is looking to approve a COVID-19 vaccine?
If we take the same standards that cyber security and vehicle safety are held up to, with the same implications for failures, and apply them to vaccine manufacturing, how would they stack up?
First, they would not be exempt from liability if their product was to cause harm. Safety would have to be proven and this would need to be certified by an unrelated third party, with no conflicts of interest. With cyber security, penetration testing can never be performed by the company itself. This is unacceptable and would never pass compliance. It must be shown during audits that proper processes have been followed, including thorough testing.
Car manufacturers are forced to perform significant crash testing, completely destroying their own product over and over, learning from its weaknesses, and forced to make improvements repeatedly, until they meet these stringent minimum safety requirements. Their crash test dummies show them how a human would be affected by the accident.
Yet with any vaccine injury, the manufacturers are exempt from liability and prosecution and with the looming COVID-19 vaccines, emergency approvals are allowing them to bypass much of the safety testing. And unlike cyber security, vaccine manufacturers can still manage to do business at the highest levels with governments, while having extensive criminal records, and they do it without being questioned. How can this be?
Our department of health and its Therapeutic Goods Administration are approving vaccines, made by organisations who have;-
known criminal convictions
extremely poor safety studies they often perform themselves
done no long-term safety and efficacy trials
been granted immunity from any liability
So not only does the government abuse the process of due diligence, they go on to abuse its people by coercing us into submitting to these vaccines, by "making them as mandatory as possible". Scott Morrison was the architect of "no jab, no play", so they know exactly how to make us submit to their will.
On top of this, they narrow exemptions to only a few medical reasons and the vaccines get administered without spot-testing for immediate or long-term reactions, meaning you may get an exemption AFTER you sustain an injury. And claim it is for our safety?
We must take the lessons of the past and apply them here for the safety of the population. Remember, it wasn't that long ago we discovered that Agent Orange, DDT, Glyphosate, plastics, formaldehyde, Vioxx and asbestos weren't safe after-all, and in fact are responsible for horrendous injuries, death, genetic mutations and cause environmental damage. It also warrants a mention that "medical error" is the third leading cause of death, behind heart disease and cancer.
Many will argue that we need the vaccine to open up, and this warrants the warp speed in which they are being brought to market. That it is the physical distancing and other isolation measures that have protected us from the disease. But the statistics tell a different story. 80% of people who test positive don't even know they have it because the symptoms are so mild. Plus the death rate is remarkably low and if you exclude those who died with co-morbidities, it's lower still. Is it unreasonable to say that the bulk of the harm done has been caused by the response to the disease, and not the disease itself?
But Pfizer tells us their vaccine is more than 90% effective, I hear you say. So let's look at this more closely, stripping away the marketing and looking at the facts. The first fact I must state is that data for the interim analysis has not been peer reviewed or published. This is a press release masquerading as science. Remember, Pfizer stand to make a lot of money from rolling this vaccine out.
And while we're on the topic of money, on the day Pfizer released its human trial results its stock price increased by 15% and CEO Albert Bourla cashed in 60% of his shares earning USD$5million that day. Coincidence, or controlling the market?
Now let's unpack their claim of 90% effectiveness. Keep in mind that the total duration of time of this trial has been 2 months. Out of the 43538 participants, they took a sliver of 94 people who were confirmed positive cases. That is 0.2%. Out of those 94 people 10% received the vaccine and 90% received a placebo. 9 out of the 94 people with COVID-19 got sicker than the remaining 85. So they claim that it is 90% effective. Yes, this is only an analysis of people with the virus and the difference in the severity of the symptoms between vaccinated and unvaccinated.
They stated that "the study will also evaluate the potential for the vaccine candidate to provide protection against COVID-19 in those who have had prior exposure to SARS-CoV-2, as well as vaccine prevention against severe COVID-19 disease." Meaning, they haven't yet studied this but plan to one day.
So they haven't been able to show that it has been effective in stopping transmission and spread of the disease and contracting it, only how severe it is for people who have it. Yet the headlines certainly make you believe they have been blindingly successful. Excellent marketing in order to get approval for an Emergency Use Medication, which means they won't have to jump through all the hoops normally required, to get their drug approved for the market. These trials are not designed to see if they stop the infection.
Let's see if they use these wild claims to put forward the idea that with such an effective vaccine, it is unethical to give the placebo group a saline injection and the entire group should get the vaccine. It has been done before and if they do it here, it makes a complete farce of the human trials.
What must these car manufacturers and cyber security tech giants think of this preferential treatment? And what do you think of being crash test dummies for the pharmaceutical industry?
Just imagine for a moment that Google failed to keep your email account private and its contents became available for anyone to see? Or that your vehicle manufacturer skimped on their safety tests and released its vehicle to the market earlier than its rival, and you were injured because of their failures?
Let's put aside our judgement for a moment and look at the truths above. Anyone can see there is a clear bias here as they operate under a different set of rules. Superficially claiming to be for our safety.
What could be causing this preferential treatment? And if safety is really the objective, where are the safety studies? How can it be allowed to pass without the thorough long-term safety and efficacy studies? The Therapeutic Goods Administration claim there reason for considering fast-track approval is because COVID-19 is highly infectious and life threatening, yet government documentation contradicts this. Have the Medical-Industrial complex lobbying groups "negotiating" effectively infiltrated government to sanction their corporate interests?
The vaccine industry is a major player in the current global pandemic. This giant industry has emerged from the colossus that is the medical pharmaceutical cartel. Their interests are clear; Vaccinate the world. Their claim is to save the world from disease, but any discussion that wishes to include ANY other prevention or cure is rapidly censored. Individuals who speak out are discredited and de-platformed quicker than it's taking to get these vaccines approved.
The 'scientists' promising the only way back to a "new normal" is through a vaccine, are conveniently forgetting that the true purpose of science is to question everything and study everything. Their silencing of dissent can only be viewed as suspicious.
Anyone who has parented a child since the 1990's knows just how many vaccines they are pressed to have administered to their children. They also know the many and varied ways they are compelled to comply, such as 'no jab no play' and now 'no jab no pay'. Now a COVID-19 vaccine is being presented as the only saviour from a continued global lockdown, which they have used as the means to have us begging for it. They are content in risking the health and well-being of all future generations, and with their contact tracing and vaccine status surveillance, we also forgo our privacy and freedom in the process.
Imagine, a vaccine you are required to have in order to move around freely. And electronic health certificates to prove we have been vaccinated to gain access to basic rights such as welfare payments, attending hospitals, surgeries, dentists, concerts, even to attain a driver's license. We know that these coercion tactics are likely to push people to take this vaccine, two shots every year for the rest of their lives. The agenda is for all 7+ billion people to be big pharma clients for life. It doesn't take a mathematical genius to work out how much they stand to gain. Money is a very motivating force.
We cannot allow this corporate takeover of our government to continue. Many people are concerned about the speed with which these vaccines are being brought to market. In the government’s rush to roll out and potentially mandate the vaccines, many people have been motivated to take action to bring about honesty, transparency and accountability with this vaccine program. It is from this background that we were inspired to establish People for Safe Vaccines Ltd, a not-for-profit company, to address these issues head-on.
We have engaged Ben Clemens of Clemens Haskin Legal on a ‘no win no fee’ basis. Ben has substantial experience in legal claims against regulators and in commercial law. Ben has written to the Secretary of the Department of Health requesting a Statement of Reasons for the provisional determination for development of the AstraZeneca and Pfizer covid-19 vaccines, that the Federal government has secured. See letter below.
The provisional determination for these vaccines allows the manufacturer to bypass many steps that are key to ensuring safety and efficacy, fast-tracking it to the market and into the bodies of Australians. This is an emergency authorisation of a drug that has no long-term safety studies. Where are the proper checks and measures? Who is the arbiter to ensure due diligence is performed and people are put above profits?
If there is no arbiter, then it must be us, the people.
People for Safe Vaccines is inviting members to support this vital pursuit to restore common sense, choice and trust. We intend to facilitate dialogue with the Department of Heath and TGA, examining the facts, with a view to ensuring proper science and accountability are returned to this critical matter. It is this company that is taking this challenge to Court. And judging by the response received, it appears this will be the only way forward.
If you are concerned with having a rushed vaccine imposed upon you and you want to do something about it, join us by becoming a member. Membership fees are from as little as $20 per annum and this is your way of contributing to our advocacy of your safety.
This is our chance to challenge established systems whose "wisdom" we have blindly accepted as truth. Just because it's the accepted or traditional way does not mean we must go along with convention, when it is clearly in doubt because they have broken it themselves. As arbiters of common sense, People for Safe Vaccines rejects the idea that anyone should be their crash test dummies.
Comments