Enforced Vaccination ~ A question of safety?
“Without manufactures liability, there will be many people who will see the use of untested vaccine as a further indication the vaccines are unsafe. If there were an enforced vaccine regime: and if the vaccine produced abnormal reactions or even death: the accountability would be placed firmly in the hands of the lawmakers. I offer no argument to the use of an unlicensed vaccine in this instance. To enforce the vaccine would and could break the already tenuous faith and support of the government and its advisors by the general public. So, unlicensed vaccines yes: Enforced use of unlicensed vaccine’s changes the legal position of the enforcers. The choice to have an untested (no liability) vaccines should remain with the individual”.
Many fact-checkers are working on social media streams. And many people believe they possess answers to current issues. I’m not offering anything other than a personal point of view. I’m assessing ideas (not the certainty) put forward by many scientists. In other words, the many sides of the proposition. All have compelling viewpoints. Interestingly, my research for the pro’s and con’s of C-19 vaccination was in finding an answer to a Facebook post on 22nd August 2020, it was:
“With the survival rate of ‘corona’ close to 100% without a vaccine. What exactly will the purpose of a vaccine be?”
Indeed a valid question? Not surprisingly, I was slated as foolish and ignorant. One individual sarcastically wrote: ‘No need for vaccines then, I’ll use my tinfoil hat to protect me’ – An unsatisfactory reply indeed: You see, I have been and will continue to be inoculated for polio, small-pox (severe reaction), T.B, tetanus, Yellow fever and Tick-borne encephalitis. So to say I’m opposed to a vaccination regime is inaccurate. Suggesting I am ignorant to the benefits of vaccination is condescending at best.
However, there is a lesson learned:
Rarely will an opinion be considered if force is used, or insult or superior arrogance. The intelligent will seek and appraise the available information: this is the way of constructive and critical thinking. Not only do I have to consider my safety, but the broader implications are of paramount importance.
I have no issue with inoculation: with the caveat, the vaccine must be as safe as possible. Those who feel the untested product has merit and will protect should take the chance. I would not consider the flu vaccination option: because evidence of a small test group with no adverse reaction is insufficient information. Indeed, we have already known of adverse reactions in the short Oxford vaccine test. If we have issues with a confined test: there must be cautious before general use begins. I cannot be sure there is one flu vaccine with precisely the same formula being used countrywide. Who knows the number of labs working on the vaccine? Which one will be best and which one will be safest? Not only this, but best protection would also come from three doses! And the government is suggesting one dose will be sufficient. The issue is becoming a sheet of thin ice.
From my perspective: I’m content with the chance of being C-19 infected. It is evident thousands of people are testing positive without illness or symptoms. Something suggesting either a flaw in the testing process or the disease is not as dangerous as first proposed by the Chinese and WHO. Both claimed the issue with C-19 was a higher infection and transmission rates. Again, it is easy to find a conflicting opinion on all sides. As we look at the hundreds of thousands of positive tests without symptoms or illness: there is need to consider how dangerous the C-19 is: as the infection rate could already have been astronomical during the initial outbreak. But there is NO previous flu testing records to evidence or compare to these findings. However, there is plenty of evidence to compare the death rates of previous decades.
The Graph below is taken from the National Office of Statistics:
Governments argue lockdowns prevented millions of deaths. And yet: the death rate in the 0-60 age group is 0.01%. A sound argument could be presented that the lockdown prevented no excess deaths because C-19 was less risk than first assumed.
In fairness to those who believe otherwise: We can accept there is no reason to dismiss their opinion, except there is no ‘control’ situation to prove the point either way. Sweden did not lockdown, and their death rate was 50 per 100000. The Uk’s death rate per 100000 is 71. Again, this is not good science, as every country has a different demographic.
Vaccine redundant due to mutation?
I researched the mutation time of different cases of flu viruses and six months is insufficient time to observe this aspect of C-19. So it is pointless to speculate on this aspect of choice. The consideration is a vaccine developed today would have little use in preventing a mutated C-19 virus.
The threat from the disease – or danger of death?
Testing suggests for the majority of people C-19 offers no heightened danger of death than other flu epidemics. We see plenty of positives with few even knowing they had the disease. It is not possible to know if the yearly flu has always followed this pattern. Because we have never had such intensive testing, not only this, many articles are suggesting the PCR test is flawed. I’m not qualified to make the assessment: however, I have to consider this element of choice to vaccinate or not.
I am in my 63rd year and have never had a flu jab and nor will I do so: if the enforcement comes. Then I’ll put up with the restrictions or penalties imposed: my choice, my health. You see this seems to me to be a ‘Tin Hat’ C-19 vaccination. And I have a problem with the fact one enforced vaccination may not be the right one for me: or am I missing something?
Could the vaccine eliminate the virus worldwide? Or in every countrywide? There is little evidence to suggest this is the case. With fundamental research I discover the flu vaccine’s effectiveness varies for the year to year: at worse it is 10% at best 65%, and for the best advantage the vaccine would need to be repeated three times! As a marker to the time scale involved: The polio vaccine is a safe and established product: To eradicate the disease worldwide has taken 40 years! Think about this with care.
The Yearly Flu Curve:
Scientific studies are supporting the rise and fall of flu epidemics. C-19 follows this pattern with a high, but not the highest rate. And, in previous years, the death rate was calculated from deaths from the disease; the statistics were not increased with the deaths with the disease figures. Already, the original models are reduced from 52 thousand to 40! If the previous highest annual death rates considered, this epidemic does not repeat the worse years of the flu virus. Are governments desperate to roll out a vaccine to stem the realisation they have financially ruined the world economy and lives of billions of people for no reason? If the yearly flu curve graph is correct: they are on a safe bet. It will be easy to claim lockdown and vaccination saved the world. The outcome of the ‘yearly flu curve’ would seem to prove they were right all the time.
The Graph below is taken from the National Office of Statistics:
I’m concerned about the Ferguson algorithm used to predict the outcome of the virus death rate; the algorithm used to predict other pandemics. A software which failed to demonstrate accurate results. And this algorithm continues to be used to predict the flu death figures for late 2020. In a similar vein, we were bombarded with comparisons to the 1900’s Spanish Flu epidemic. The social criteria of 1900’s Europe and Britain have no relation to today’s society. For example, bathing and personal hygiene are light years away from each other: medical care has no comparison: Communications were postal, newspaper and radio. I’m just not into the fear-mongering of this comparison.
I’m indeed thankful for the ‘Tin Hat’ sleight a contemptuous, arrogant and superior statement has confirmed my distrust in the vaccine. There will be many who’ll disagree with the article. But, I’ll leave you with a last thought: the damage to personal freedoms is beyond life. Millions of young men and women have been slaughtered without question during wars: WW2 – Vietnam – Congo – Terrorism. Every death accepted as a consequence of the fight for freedom. Every sacrifice now is seen to be wasted: freedom is damaged beyond repair.
Illness is part of the organic process of the human body: Death is a certainty: So what happens next year when C-20 follows the same pattern as many previous influenza outbreaks? We are in a net made from an invisible fabric of germs or bacteria. Now we know the implications of germ warfare: Science? Offers possible security in one test tube and makes death in another.
The new future?
I’m not optimistic, it is horror, every time I read the two words Broken Britain I see something far worse than an aspect of life and death. I see the long term horrors of something which will be a reoccurring incident. And there is no vaccine waiting in the future for further mutations. No vaccine for the loss of jobs, homes, dignity, wealth, mental health.