Indeed: What has the very naughty and very suspended MP said about vaccines? He said:
“There are very reasonable questions to be asked about the safety and effectiveness of the experimental mRNA vaccines and the risks and benefits of these treatments.”
Oh, dear. That will never do. Not in this bright, new and shining, as well as distinctly better-informed, age of authoritarianism; the age of reason having long shuffled off this mortal coil.
Thank the good Lord that Paracelsus lived in the much more enlightened 16th century when he uttered his truism: “All [medicinal] substances are poisons; there is none which is not; the dose differentiates a poison from a remedy.” If the bloke had lived in this brave new world the BBC would no doubt be onto him as well – ‘Tonight on Reality Check we interview Swiss medicine-denier Theo Paracelsus. What have you to say for yourself; Theo?’
In reality-checking Reality Check we find the statement, also uttered by Saintly Ash here in confirming the link between the twin cardites and Pfizer, “There were 15 reports of suspected heart inflammation or scarring (myocarditis or pericarditis) for every one million…” Hmmm. Really? So here in New Zealand, there have been (close to) 12 million jabs administered, so we have 12 x 15 = 180 peri/myo’s here do we? Well, no: we had 1,107 prior to 30 November, 2022. There’ll be more by now. That’s on top of the 104 ‘myocardial infarctions’ (heart attacks), 33 ‘cardiac arrests’, and a 63 ‘cardiac failures’ recorded here. So, with the ’15-per-million’ figure so completely at odds with experience, what the hell is wrong with saying ‘Ahem, about those numbers?’
It doesn’t make you a crackpot to question, and it shouldn’t make you subject to derision. Yet it does.
There’s a question I have, and have banged on about before, concerning the massive difference between the sexes in ‘Adverse Events Following Immunisation’ here, and worldwide, with females twice as likely to suffer an AEFI than males. Why? And why can’t we ask?
I wrote to several parties, including ‘experts’, MOH, Medsafe, etc, about this. Medsafe delayed, dodged, and eventually said the dog ate their homework (they didn’t, but they might as well have) while leading virologist Dr Helen Petousis-Harris answered that perhaps due to women having better self-health awareness they therefore have higher reporting rates. Dr HPH is no slouch, and I have no reason to doubt her suspicion, but is her theory borne out across other vaccine scenarios? I collated three other random specs for AEFI’s as recorded on the WHO’s Vigiaccess page (which keeps stats on these important AEFI matters). You be the judge. One of these, as they say, is not (at all) like the others:
“There are very reasonable questions to be asked about the safety and effectiveness of the experimental mRNA vaccines and the risks and benefits of these treatments.” Why can’t we ask?
