SHOCKER: No legit basis for any COVID19 vaccine mandates
When it comes to using force or coercion to achieve vaccination (for example, withholding education from children in California-Mississippi-West Virginia style; or demanding a ‘vaccine passport’) there’s only one arguably legitimate justification: it benefits the public by preventing the spread of disease. I don’t think it’s actually a legit justification, but it’s used as such for every vaccine mandate in the world.
I wonder if any COVID19 vaccine policy-makers were surprised, or even cared, about the recent shocking admission by pro-vaxer Dr. Jay Bhattacharya that COVID19 vaccines don’t stop the transmission of disease (see the video at about 2:00 to 3:00). Bhattacharya is described as “Professor of Medicine and Professor (by Courtesy) of Economics at Stanford University, and one of the world's leading experts on public health policy.”
“But, what we learned […] after […] the vaccines were released, is that, in fact, the vaccines are not very effective at stopping you from getting COVID; it’s not very effective at stopping the transmission of COVID. […] A very large fraction of people who’ve been vaccinated have had COVID […] subsequent to the vaccination, because the vaccine does not stop you from getting or, COVID, or from transmitting COVID.” — Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.
The implications are profound, even if Bhattacharya doesn’t say so—if the vaccines don’t prevent the spread of disease, then no one, anywhere—no politicians, no policy makers, no government bureaucrats, no corporate executives, no academic boards—have now, or ever had, a legitimate basis for forcing or coercing anyone to get vaccinated.
Given the massive number of serious injuries and deaths reported from COVID19 vaccines—some of which were administered under duress—something like that could theoretically, if justice still happens, bankrupt or even imprison a lot of very comfortable people.
If the people involved in mandating COVID19 vaccines are by some miracle held to account for their actions, a key question will be whether they knew, or should have known, the vaccines wouldn’t prevent the transmission of disease. Dr. Bhattacharya hedges, saying this revelation came sometime after the vaccines were released on the market. Is that true?
Pfizer says no—they never claimed the vaccines would prevent the transmission of disease. In fact, in this video, Pfizer employee J. Small, testifying in the European Parliament, seems amused by the naive idea they would investigate such a thing. They were far too busy moving at “the speed of science,” which I understand is about 6 times the speed of logic these days.
That leaves one question: was it reasonable for policy-makers to assume the COVID19 vaccines would prevent the spread of disease, in the absence of any specific evidence of it—based on historical precedent, for example? The obvious answer is “no,” since the vaccines are a new type never widely used on humans before.
But it goes even deeper than that: it turns out the issue of contagion has been tiptoed around in the medical industry for decades—following early research indicating it could very well be a complete myth. This topic deserves a post of its own—more to come.