Quick note on the use of “overcoming vaccine hesitancy” as a government, health regulator, medic, institution, company or MSM excuse for suppressing adverse events from C19 injections (85,000 deaths?)
After watching this 4 hour exchange of legal views:
Aside from Julian Gillespie’s bombshell of there being 10,000 deaths and half a million adverse events on the non-public database for Australian adverse events maintained by the TGA, compared to the 1,000 or so deaths and 136,000 adverse events reported via the Australian adverse events database available to the public - Julian also commented that “vaccine hesitancy” has no legal standing in any government measures.
Australia has administered 68 million injections to its 26 million people. If the one death per 800 doses holds true, there will have been 85,000 deaths from C19 injections.
Verification of public TGA-DAEN system results from here:
Database of Adverse Event Notifications - results (tga.gov.au)
There is no basis for citing “vaccine hesitancy” by anyone as a medical, scientific or legal justification. The term does not exist in any enforceable form in any legislation.
The issue of “vaccine hesitancy” as a defence for suppressing information is far more egregious and the term itself is a marketing device by those selling vaccines.
No rational person would risk harm without proportionate and sizeable benefit. This is not “hesitancy” this is common sense.
Informed consent would have stated “from our clinical trials, we might reduce your risk of infection by 1%, whilst there is a 20% chance you will experience an adverse event – including a 1% higher chance you will get hospitalised and a slightly higher risk of death – also you do not need the injection of you have already been infected AND the risk of harm increases with each dose”.
That “informed consent” information has nothing to do with any marketing term called “hesitancy” – it has everything to do with “information that could prevent personal injury and death”.
Any government official or health regulator or MSM “member” that thinks that discouraging “vaccine hesitancy” by withholding informed consent is concealing potential “vaccine harm”.
Onwards!
Please subscribe or donate via Ko-fi – any amount from 3 bucks upwards. Don’t worry and God Bless, if you can’t or don’t want to. Ko-fi donations here: https://ko-fi.com/peterhalligan - an annual subscription of 100 bucks is one third less than a $3 Ko-fi donation a week!
"Overcoming self-preservation instincts."
How an exterminator thinks about pest control.
So common sense now supplants ethics? Not the best overall choice, although one could argue in an uncompassionate, secular, globalist, technofascist society that natural selection and the Darwin Awards evidently still have their place?