How are you feeling now the Covid-19 vaccine comes into view? I have my reservations
The journey this vaccine has traveled and the catalysts that have propelled it are all wrapped in a force-field of confusion which makes it nigh on impossible to focus clearly on the fundamental reasons that support its existence.
I have a knot in my stomach and a palpable feeling of dread every time I think about this "miracle vaccine". It is being rolled out at warp speed and with the potential cash bonanza on offer for its creators this has all the ingredients needed for a catastrophic disaster. Spidey-senses are definitely tingling!
Working backwards and starting from the top, here are my concerns over the vaccine, the "independent" bodies tasked with reviewing its safety and, finally, with the virus itself.
I've recently been involved in a conversation on Facebook where a friend had asked for people's opinions on whether they think the vaccine is safe and if they would take it. Besides missing the point about whether it was necessary for fit, healthy, people to take a vaccine, folk flooded the comments section with their opinions. As I read through the comments I noticed a common thread which rather disturbed me...
"You shouldn't worry about how quick this vaccine has been created because my friend who is a nurse has assured me it isn't new. This vaccine is just using old vaccine research which has been tweaked a bit".
As part of my own response to this question, I felt it important to point out that the Pfizer vaccine was anything but "ordinary".
Working in collaboration with the German firm BioNTech, the product is an mRNA vaccine. If approved, it will be the first-ever mRNA vaccine on the market.
Traditional Vaccines vs. mRNA Vaccines
A typical vaccine directly stimulates the immune response. A microbe or protein injection sets off alarms, inflammation occurs, and antibodies are produced. The same eventually happens with an mRNA vaccine, but there's a crucially different first step: The mRNA must be taken up by your body cells, and then your own cells produce the protein that stimulates an immune response.
It has been claimed that this new type of RNA vaccine makes fundamental changes to your DNA and that these changes are irreversible and even get passed down to your children. One counter-arguments to this claims is that this vaccine introduces messenger-RNA. Your DNA is unaffected, and your children will not inherit the immunity.
I would advise anyone to pay due-diligence to the subject if you really want to wrap your head around it.
What we can be sure of is that this type of vaccine(RNA) has never been tested on humans before, and with that in mind you wouldn't think now is the time to throw caution to the wind. Cutting the timeframe from 10-20 years, which is the average length of time it takes to create a "safe" vaccine, down to just 6-months is risky even for a conventional vaccine, never mind one that's never been attempted before. What also alarms me about the vaccine and all the different companies involved in being the one to make the breakthrough is the language being used. Every time I read or hear something from the industry, or from the MSM, the terminology is the same. Just take a read of this first paragraph taken from American Council on Science and Health
"The race for the first FDA approved coronavirus vaccine is heating up, and it appears that Pfizer may cross the finish line first."
And then there is this from The Guardian, reporting on the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine...
"An international vaccine battle has begun, one that is likely to be repeated many times over the next year as new, competing vaccines are produced to help rid the world of Covid-19"
When it comes to vaccines and the unaccountable companies that create them, words like "Battle", "Race" and "Finish line" don't sit well with me. And while the UK government seems to be rubber stamping their approval by placing monsterous orders before approval you can only imagine how much this makes the CEO's of AstraZeneca and Pfizer drool at the prospect of such unprsidented windfalls. But if all those elements aren't enough to help create a perfect storm, it would be foolish to forget that any company creating a vaccine for Covid-19 has complete imunity from prosecution. This is a perfect environment for mistakes to happen and it appears silly mistakes are already being made...
"...But they also revealed that a sub-set of volunteers had been mistakenly given a lower dose of vaccine due to problems manufacturing it. Bizarrely, that lower dosage produced a higher vaccine efficacy: around 90%. The scientists had no explanation for this anomaly."
(Conveniently, this was a mistake with a positive outcome. Had this been a mistake that caused harm to someone I doubt we would have heard about it)
As you can see, there are serious concerns that must be addressed before we start rolling up our sleeves for nursey and what I've mentioned is just the tip of the iceberg. It seems there is no part of this operation that doesn't have some form of smoke that leads to yet another proverbial fire. Just take the efficacy rate for example where reported results are already attracting unwanted scrutiny...Here is a short video of Dr Mike Yeadon, former Chief Scientific Advisor with Pfizer, talking about his views on the AstraZeneca vaccine and the pandemic in general...
So, we've covered the efficacy of the vaccine, the language used by the companies and the media, and we've looked at the issue of how this vaccine has never before been used on humans. But what about the all-important side-effects...
It was only this morning when I tuned in to the BBC's Andrew Marr show, discussing the vaccine and its implications. During the show, he had various guests but one guest in particular really stuck out and what she had to say is well worth a listen.
If you fast-forward to 33mins 10secs, you will hear Andrew Marrs introduce Dr. June Raine, Chief Executive of MRHA. Amongst many startling omissions Dr. Raine doesn't seem to bat an eyelid when mentioning that they have only "1-MONTHS WORTH OF DATA" in respect to following adverse reactions in trial patients after the 2nd dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, a vaccine that's about to be rolled out to the public, en masse...
And before I go on to talk about the MRHA and their own conflicts of interest, I would like to bring another important piece of information under the spotlight...
Still think this vaccine is safe? I'm really starting to doubt it and the reassurances from those who are ready to roll up their sleeves are beginning to fade into insignificance.
But let's not stop here because the depths of this particular dive seem to be infinite...
For those who don't know, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is, according to Wikipedia, an executive agency of the Department of Health and Social Care in the United Kingdom which is responsible for ensuring that medicines and medical devices work and are acceptably safe. This agency claims to be an independent regulator, but as you are about to find out this is far from the truth.
Amongst other conflicts, like the fact that many members of MRHA have independent shares in various vaccine companies(mentioned in a recent episode of UKColumn news), there is also this scandalous piece of information reported on May 2020 by https://childrenshealthdefense.org/
The Oxford Vaccine Group(OVG) is politically wired. Lead developer Andrew Pollard juggles scandalous conflicts that allow him to license, register, and mandate his own untested vaccines to the masses. Pollard is Senior Advisor to Britain’s MRHA Panel which licenses vaccines, chairs Britain’s JVCI committee that mandates them, and advises the European Medicine Agency (EMA). He takes payments from virtually all the big vaccine makers. In 2014, Pollard developed GlaxoSmithKline’s notorious Bexsero meningitis vaccine, and then mandated it to children despite significant safety signals for Kawasaki Disease and the rarity of meningococcal B infections. The package insert says Bexsero may cause Kawasaki disease in as many as one out of every 1000 children based on reports in the clinical trials.
Pollard used his power and deceitful puffery about the monkey trial to bulldoze his COVID vaccine into human trials. He shunned inert placebo tests and restricted safety studies to three weeks to hide long-term injuries.
If it wasn't apparent to you already, I think I've raised enough issues to give serious cause for concern. As many of you will know, I have highlighted just a few of the many different issues surrounding this vaccine and, worryingly, there are many many more. I could literally go on forever as there seems to be an endless number of rabbit holes to explore. The statistics and the models that have been used in order to coerce the UK's civilian population to accept unimaginably draconian policies deserve a post all to themselves. Neil Ferguson, Chris Whitty, and Patrick Vallance have all manipulated the figures and played pivotal roles when it comes to policies that have been implemented in the name of "science". The mathematical gymnastics are truly mind-boggling and I think that was their intention to some degree.
Confusion has been the governments' primary weapon against its own people, knowing that a confused herd is easily controlled. It was, again, the UKColoumn who uncovered that it was the Behavioral Insights team and Mindspace who are instructing the government on Covid policies and many other social issues. It was, in fact, Mindspace who instructed Boris Johnson and his advisors inside the cabinet office about Covid, telling them they needed to "Ramp up the fear" if they wanted the civilian populous to become obedient subjects.
Dr. David Halpern is co-author of the 96-page report MINDSPACE: Influencing behaviour through public policy, published by the Cabinet Office and the Institute for Government. ‘Nudging’ is described in that key document as ‘cues [that] act on people without their conscious knowledge: indeed, people actively resist the suggestion that their actions are being influenced.’