Friday Funnies
What could possibly go wrong? February 25, 2022
And just like that… no more COVID!
How to Get Along With Narrative Believers - NARRATIVE SCRIPTS
OK - The JP video below may not be everyone’s cup of tea and some might think it isn’t suitable for all ages. Use discretion... you have been forewarned.
Dr. Malone-
Thought this might make your day!
An Ontario judge has dismissed the father's motion and ruled in favor of the mother NOT to vaccinate the two children. The mother cites, in part, some of your comments as evidence. It's been determined by the judge that you the other "well known leaders in their fields" are "not crackpots or charlatans":):).........
"[60] For example, the article submitted by the mother “Are People Getting Full Facts on COVID Vaccine Risks?” quotes Dr. Robert W. Malone, the inventor of the mRNA vaccine. Whether he is right or wrong about the current use of COVID vaccines is a matter for discussion and determination. But with his credentials, he can hardly be dismissed as a crackpot or fringe author. The mother referred to the following excerpt from the article:
The original inventor of the mRNA vaccine (and DNA vaccine) core platform technology currently used to create the vaccines is Dr Robert W Malone. Dr Malone has been expressing serious concerns about how therapeutic approaches that are still in the research phase are being imposed on an ill-informed public. He says that public health leadership has, "stepped over the line and is now violating the bedrock principles which form the foundation upon which the ethics of clinical research are built".
Dr Malone asks why health leaders seem to be so afraid of sharing the adverse event data. He says, "Why is it necessary to suppress discussion and full disclosure of information concerning mRNA reactogenicity and safety risks?"
He goes onto say that we should be analysing the safety data and risks vigorously. Again he asks, "Is there information or patterns that can be found, such as the recent finding of the cardiomyopathy signals, or the latent virus reactivation signals? We should be enlisting the best biostatistics and machine learning experts to examine these data, and the results should -- no must -- be made available to the public promptly".
For any drug it has always been important to have systems in place for monitoring adverse events. However, for an experimental, genetic modifying approach that has not been fully tested, and where the public are effectively the guinea pigs, this information should be immediately and readily available. As previously reported...the fact that it is so difficult to access and make sense of ...reporting systems - along with low reporting simply raises further concern about what is actually happening.
. . . .
Dr Malone says, " .. what is being done by suppressing open disclosure and debate concerning the profile of adverse events associated with these vaccines violates fundamental bioethical principles for clinical research".
With regard to the use and abuse of misinformation, the inventor of these vaccines says that the public have to be given accurate information to allow informed consent. He says, "The suppression of information, discussion, and outright censorship concerning these current COVID vaccines which are based on gene therapy technologies cast a bad light on the entire vaccine enterprise. It is my opinion that the adult public can handle information and open discussion. Furthermore, we must fully disclose any and all risks associated with these experimental research products".
In short, it is simply not possible to arrive at a position of informed consent unless you have access to the full facts around your options and the associated risks and benefits.
[61] The same article outlines other serious concerns about COVID vaccines expressed by Dr. Bret Weinstein, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Tess Lawrie, Professor Stanley S. Levinson (medicine, endocrinology, diabetes and metabolism) and Professor Sucharit Bhakdi (awarded the Order of Merit for medical microbiology). These are well-known leaders in their fields.
[62] Several other articles presented by the mother outline similar expressions of concern about the COVID vaccines from equally qualified and reputable sources worldwide.
[63] For clarity:
a. I am not for one moment suggesting that we should presume the mother’s experts are right.
b. But once we determine they’re not crackpots and charlatans, how can we presume that they are wrong? Or that they couldn’t possibly be right about any of their warnings?
c. When children’s lives are at stake, how can we ignore credible warnings?"
The entire ruling is a fascinating read:
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2022/2022onsc1198/2022onsc1198.html
Enjoy your day. You deserve it!
Rachel
I look forward to these.