COVID-19 vaccination in children - major ethical and health concerns.
Parents, teachers and just anyone who cares about the wellbeing of children should be asking this question: Is the current emergency covid-19 jab rollout a real or potential danger to children?
If it is, then surely in good conscience, we should stop it.
The Government has made it clear it wants to see over 12s given the Covid vaccine before the start of the school year in September.
But the Covid-19 jabs are NOT vaccines. Over the years we have become rather blasé about vaccines.
These are something very different and brought in under emergency legislation before, yes, before the official trials are even completed.
So, are we seriously considering giving young people, at a vulnerable stage in their development, experimental jabs, for a disease from which they themselves have little or no chance of suffering ill effects?
The UK government is going from strength to strength in its incompetence, unaccountability, lying and manipulation.
On 21st April it quietly amended the Children's Act to enable vaccination teams to go into schools and jab children without their parent's consent, claiming they have successfully sought, obtained and accurately recorded true 'informed consent' from the pupils, based on a 'Gillick Competency' protocol. They claim children will be shown the risks versus benefits of a Covid-19 jab and impartially present for and against arguments and pertinent factual information, such as the ingredients in the vaccines. On that basis children are expected after a short presentation, and with all the perils of peer pressure, to make their informed consent without reference to their parents.
The Moderna vaccine, for instance, contains SM-102 - and if you want to know what cancer and infertility look like, go and have a quick read of the safety data sheet on that little beauty. Let's be clear - the jabs are not proven to inoculate you against catching the disease (in fact lots of stories are hitting the headlines this month about jabbed people catching covid-19 and dying) and the extent to which they may prevent you from passing on the disease is also unknown.
These injections instruct your cells, through an experimental mRNA messaging system, to manufacture its own synthetic covid spike proteins, a small part of the actual disease.
The body 'freaks out', detecting an intruder, and ramps up the immune system to attack what is essentially a part of your own body - something your body has produced.
Antibody Dependent Enhancement helps get the synthesised disease-parts into the cells, where they are replicated for an unknown period of time.
So when/if the jab wears off, have you trained your body to only be able to fight off covid-19 with the aid of a jab? What happens when you come into contact with the real thing again? Isn't the ongoing process of the bodies' immune system attacking substances produced by the body itself an auto-immune disease?
All the vaccine trials have specifically excluded children. Effects of the vaccine on children are therefore completely unknown. The vaccines being rolled out have only limited short-term safety data and no long-term safety data available. Known potential, late-onset effects from vaccines that have not yet been ruled out include adverse immune response to infection, neurological disorders, autoimmune disease and pregnancy related problems which could take months or years to become apparent.
The Covid jabs are gene therapy, but they are being presented as vaccines. When ingrained dumbed-down culture strengthens the iron hand of a wealthy and powerful pharmaceutical industry, it is easy (with the help of the media and social media giants) to shut down all debate about vaccines and gene therapy masquerading as vaccines, because the 'system' has decreed that only the correct opinion be heard. That is, that all vaccines always cure people and completely protect them from all disease, death and danger. We may feel safer. But it is just plain wrong and dangerous. We must conform to 'stay safe'.
Covid-19 experimental mRNA technology gene therapy injections are totally irresponsible so-called treatments to try out on anyone, let alone children. There are up to 10,000 people dead as a direct result of the jabs in the UK to date and counting (based on 1,000 recorded deaths* and MHRA's printed acknowledgement that only between 1 and 10% of all adverse events are ever reported). There are up to 85,000,000 adverse events reported (1 or 2 per jabbed person).
Children are the least likely demographic to catch covid. The number of otherwise healthy children who have died of covid can literally be counted on one hand - thank God. The benefits of children being possibly even less likely to catch covid19 DO NOT outweigh the substantial risks of jabbing them with this risky and experimental injection.
During the Nuremberg Trials, the concept of properly informed consent in medicine was crystalised, recorded and written into law in Germany and in our own country. It was intended as a safeguard so that what happened in medical experiments and death camps in Nazi Germany would never, ever happen again. During the Trials, politicians, military leaders, doctors and scientists were all convicted of wilful harm, sometimes because they were simply 'following orders'.
Commencing research in children, in advance of published adult long-term safety data, could be in breach of the Nuremberg Code. We need not look far back into history to remember the devastating harms a rushed-to-market vaccination can have. Over 1,000 children were permanently disabled with narcolepsy caused by the Pandemrix Swine Flu vaccine. Rapid rollout of a new vaccine for Dengue fever resulted in the deaths of 10 children in the Philippines, not at the time of the vaccination but months later when they next encountered the Dengue virus. To repeat any such mistakes here would be unforgivable. The immune system is phenomenally complex and still poorly understood. Experimenting on young children for a disease that carries vanishingly small risks is a road no ethical scientist should walk down. It is a clear departure from the precautionary principle and many independent scientific experts strongly advise against it.
For further supportive information please visit...