Governments are pushing for mass vaccinations arguing, that in order to end lockdowns and other restrictions, it is necessary to inoculate the whole population.

 

Covid vaccines are neither proven to be safe and effective nor without alternative

We are not against vaccines and would take a Covid vaccine immediately, if proper testing had proven its safety and effectiveness. The U.S. CDC and the U.K. NHS state bluntly on their websites, that COVID vaccines are “safe and effective”. People in other countries are given similar confirmations. Are such claims supported by facts?

So far, all Covid vaccines have not completed regular approval processes. In the USA, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a so-called Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for each product. Such an EUA allows “unapproved medical products or unapproved uses of approved medical products to be used in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent COVID-19 when there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives”.  We will cover the topic of adequate and available alternatives further below.

In the EU the vaccines have been granted a Conditional Marketing Authorization (CMA) as recommended by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Such an authorization can be granted, if – among others – the following criteria are met: i) the benefit-risk balance of the medicine is positive; ii) it is likely that the applicant will be able to provide comprehensive data post-authorisation; iii) the medicine fulfils an unmet medical need; iv) the benefit of the medicine’s immediate availability to patients is greater than the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still required.”

While regulatory authorities claim, that they have been in intensive contact with the vaccine companies for most of the development period, the official evaluation process was carried out in record time. For instance, for the BioNTech–Pfizer ‘Comirnaty’ vaccine it took EMA just 21 days (01.12. – 21.12.20) from submission of the final documents by the companies to recommending granting conditional marketing approval. We can’t help it, but somehow, we are reminded of the Boeing 737 MAX fiasco, where the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) ‘outsourced” most of the certification activities to Boeing. Over 300 passengers had to die in two crashes, before the aircraft was finally grounded for over a year.

That testing had not been finished was admitted in a Pfizer press release on the day of the EMA recommendation. It mentioned the ongoing Phase 3 trial and that “data from this study, including longer term safety, comprehensive information on duration of protection, efficacy against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, and safety and immunogenicity in adolescents 12 to 17 years of age, will be gathered in the months ahead. Additional studies are planned to evaluate BNT162b2 in pregnant women, children younger than 12 years, and those in special risk groups, such as the immunocompromised.” To put it plainly, if you get the vaccine before proper testing is completed, you are a guinea pig. 

Some medical practitioners and researchers in the USA and Europe have requested to stop inoculating people with experimental vaccines. Their warnings are supported by a growing number of reports of adverse vaccine reactions.

Details about people, who have died or suffered serious side effects after being vaccinated, can be found in data banks such as VAERS and OpenVAERS for the USA and EurdraVigilance for the EU. The many reported cases, quite a few of them deadly, indicate, that Covid vaccines carry a lot more risks than the normal flu shot. And those databanks only cover short-term issues. Many doctors are particularly concerned about potential adverse effects in the long-term, especially with the vaccines based on mRNA technology, that has never been approved for human vaccines before.

Often there is no conclusive evidence, that death or severe illness were directly caused by the vaccine and would not have occurred anyway. As all country health authorities are under the direct command of the government and have been heavily propagating vaccines, it is unlikely that they will carry out a thorough analysis, and even if they do, the final report might not be impartial.

Based on the preliminary approval documents it is clear, that none of the vaccines provides 100% protection against falling sick with Covid. EMA claims in their recommendation letters, that vaccine efficacy is between 60% for AstraZeneca and 95% for Pfizer-Biontech. Once larger parts of the population have been tested, we will know whether the actual rate is higher or lower.

You would expect, that a vaccine lessens the severity of a disease, if you are unlucky enough to get it after inoculation. But this is not yet proven for Covid vaccines. There are doctors who claim, that the vaccine might even increase the risk, for instance because of Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE). We have no clue whether this claim is justified or just another vaccine myth. But we find it disconcerting, that a Michigan Department of Health spokeswomen recently confirmed 117 hospitalizations and 3 deaths among 246 citizens, who had a positive Covid test 14 days or more after the last vaccine dose. Many similar cases can easily be found on the web.

Both CDC and EMA acknowledge, that it is unclear how long vaccines can protect people and whether existing vaccines provide protection against mutants. However, as pharma companies are already working on vaccine variations, you can expect to be urged/forced to get a new jab at regular intervals. A lasting multi-billion-dollar business is born.

We don’t know whether future researchers will refer to current vaccines as ‘miraculous life savers’, ‘agents of a second Holocaust’ or anything in between. But we know one thing for sure: Politicians, health bureaucrats, pharma executives and influencers who call experimental vaccines ‘safe and effective’ are not saying the truth. To be honest, they would have to inform about the expediated approval process, the lack of data on potentially adverse or even lethal side effects, and the remaining risk of getting Covid.

Experimental vaccines might be acceptable, if the risk of dying was very high. However, the Infection Fatality Risk (IFR) is 0.05% for those under 70 years of age and might be as low as 0.001% for children. Only those in their 70ies, 80ies and 90ies and people with hypertension, diabetes and obesity face values above 1% (for details check here, here and here). Other infectious diseases such as Ebola, MERS and SARS have a much higher mortality risk.

Vaccines are not without alternative, as several medicines are confirmed to considerably reduce the severity of Covid-19. Many doctors and medical associations recommend the use of ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and other cheap and readily available drugs, together with zinc and vitamin D as a prophylactic protocol and treatment of Covid (please check here, here, here and for a comprehensive overview here).

There has been a lot of lobbying against hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and global trials had to be stopped, after a devastating assessment in the Lancet, a leading medical journal. Later, the respective paper had to be retracted, after serious data inconsistencies were found. Other research and especially a recent large study from Iran, where Western pharmaceutical companies are not so powerful, found HCQ to be successful in early treatment. Nevertheless, in its latest guideline “Therapeutics and Covid-19”, the WHO recommended against administering hydroxychloroquine.

In the same guideline, the WHO also advised against the use of ivermectin “except in the context of a clinical trial”. This drew a fierce response from the Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) accusing the WHO of arriving at this conclusion by ignoring “several large clinical trials where ivermectin was proven to prevent mortality by more than 68%”.

We are no medical doctors or pharmacists and lack the expertise to properly evaluate the respective arguments. However, we would like to point out, that the WHO is a highly political organization and subject to intense lobbying by the pharmaceutical industry. To get truly impartial advice, you probably have to look somewhere else.

That the pharma lobby is not happy with cheap drugs, that can suppress Covid symptoms, is obvious. Why spend only a few dollars on a generic product, if you can spend a lot more on recurring shots of an experimental vaccine or go through the whole ICU experience? It appears  that over the past year quite a lot of infected patients were left without any medication until it was too late, resulting not only in tremendous additional costs, but above all in horrific human suffering.

Based on the above the ‘case for vaccination’ is not as strong as many governments claim. The elderly and those with underlying conditions face a high Covid mortality risk. For them it might make sense to get vaccinated. But why should healthy working age adults with a low mortality risk, or children with an even lower risk, take an experimental vaccine with unknown and perhaps deadly side effects, especially as other cheap and effective medicine is available?

Proponents of mass vaccinations plead, that most or better all citizens must be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity. However, herd immunity can also be acquired naturally over time. Once the elderly and those with comorbidities have been vaccinated, there should be no need to hurry. The remaining ones (i.e. the majority) only face a small risk of dying from Covid. They must carefully weight the benefits of a vaccine against the potential harm.

The decision to ‘get the jab’ is an individual decision. Some young people might decide to get it, and this is fine, if they do so after being fully informed about the risks and benefits, and without external pressure. But it is unethical / criminal, to urge /force people to take an experimental vaccine.

Vaccine passports are a tool to enforce mass vaccinations

More and more countries around the world are introducing vaccine passports. Citizens are told, that ownership of such a passport will enable them to get back their ‘normal’ life. The passports are marketed as door opener to free travel, entertainment and nightlife. What is not being said explicitly, but certainly meant, is that those who don’t have such a passport, will be excluded from such activities and socially stigmatized.

Leaving apart human rights issues related to such a passport, we could at least follow the logic, if being successfully vaccinated meant, that you can’t pass on the virus to others. Is this the case? The EU states the following on its website: “Can we still spread the disease once vaccinated? We do not yet know. Additional evaluations will be needed to assess the effect of the vaccine in preventing asymptomatic infection … Therefore, and for the time being, even vaccinated people will need to wear masks, avoid indoor crowds, and respect social distance, so on”.

The U.S. CDC arrives at a similar conclusion: “At this time, we do not know if COVID-19 vaccination will have any effect on preventing transmission. Some people can be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19 but remain asymptomatic. It is important to know whether COVID-19 vaccines can help reduce the number of people that have asymptomatic infection as these people can unknowingly spread the virus to others.”

What about people, who have already developed proven natural immunity, for instance through a previous infection with Covid or another coronavirus? The CDC  states explicitly: “Yes, you should be vaccinated regardless of whether you already had COVID-19. That’s because experts do not yet know how long you are protected from getting sick again after recovering from COVID-19.” Well, they also don’t know that for the vaccine as shown above, but who cares.

It is unclear what will happen to those, who are already known to have a higher risk from the vaccine, for instance pregnant women or those with allergies. Will they get a ‘vaccine passport waver’ and will this allow them to get back to a normal life? We doubt it, especially the latter.

To summarize the above. Governments urge us to get an experimental vaccine, that does not provide 100% protection against the current virus strain and potentially much less against newly emerging mutants, whose short-term side effects are unclear and long-term risks completely unknown, whose duration of protection is uncertain, and that might not even prevent Covid transmission to others. We are even supposed to take the jab, if we have already acquired immunity or belong to a high-risk group. In exchange they offer to return our previous normal lives, that were taken away from us by governments themselves, based on faulty logic and lacking scientific justification.

Politicians and public health bureaucrats are claiming, that nobody is forced to get inoculated. But if you can’t go to a bar or club, play group sports, travel, or apply for a new job without having a vaccine passport, you will suffer severe economic and social consequences and eventually be delegated to pariah status in our society. By limiting or even withholding basic personal and economic freedoms to citizens without Covid vaccine, governments can indirectly force people to accept an inoculation. Vaccine passports are the carrot of a ‘carrot and stick’ policy to enforce mass vaccinations. They contravene basic human rights and should be strongly rejected.

Even though the idea of launching vaccine passports lacks a sound justification and contravenes basic human rights, we expect that they will be implemented. A few countries may opt for a ‘vaccine passport light’, and those are the countries where you want to be. But the majority will go for full enforcement, making the passport a key component of their authoritarian ‘new normal’. Farewell to freedom as we knew it.

Lockdowns are already a frontal assault on human rights. But forcing experimental vaccines on healthy young people and even children, who only have a minimal risk of dying from Covid, can turn out to be a crime against humanity, if the vaccines are later proven to have serious side effects.

Disclaimer: The above is for informational purposes only. It is not an offer or advice to buy or sell any products or services. LBB and its owner do not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.

 

© 2020 Live Beyond Borders. All rights reserved