top of page

This COVID Jab is being Falsely Promoted as a ‘Vaccine’

Below I have provided six reasons why governments should not be mandating the COVID19 injection, and this includes the fact that it has been falsely promoted to the public as a 'vaccine'. But I also note that general practitioners (GP’s) as primary care providers are exempt from getting this injection if they are privately employed. This is stated under the NSW Public Health Orders and Restrictions and under WA Public Health Orders.

The public would like an explanation as to why privately employed GP’s and other primary-care providers are exempt from this injection, when it is these professionals who are most exposed to this virus in clinical situations. The Australian state governments need to provide a satisfactory explanation as to why it is necessary for other professionals, such as teachers and police, to be mandated but not those that are privately employed on the frontline?

The main reasons for the public to object to mandatory (coercive) policy include:

  1. This is a medical intervention that has been incorrectly labelled and promoted to the public as a ‘vaccine’. The World Health Organisation (WHO) states that a vaccine protects people before they come into contact with the disease, and it prevents the transmission of the disease in the community. The Australian government regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administrator (TGA), states that this medical intervention will not prevent you getting the disease, nor will it prevent transmission of the disease in the community. Further, the WHO definition states “……because vaccines contain only killed or weakened forms of germs, viruses and bacteria, they do not cause the disease or put you at risk of its complications.” This medical intervention does not contain any element of the natural coronavirus 2019 that is stated to cause COVID disease. Therefore, under the WHO’s own definition this medical intervention does not fulfil the criteria of a ‘vaccine’ and it is being falsely promoted to the public to imply that the drug has beneficial properties and rare side-effects that have not been proven in any short or long-term clinical trials in humans. The fact is this that this is new technology that is an experiment on the population.

  2. This injection contains new untested genetic technology that injects a synthetic spike protein into the human body by two different mechanisms. One of these mechanisms utilises a synthetic mRNA molecule to code for the spike protein in the human body. This genetically engineered technology is in the Moderna and Pfizer injections, and there is the potential for the mRNA molecule (nucleic acid) to insert into our own DNA to change the human blueprint for the next generation. Therefore, the full adverse health outcomes of this technology will not be known for generations to come. There is also scientific evidence that the synthetic spike protein in all the brands will specifically target the reproductive organs. The pharmaceutical companies have stated that they have not done trials that have investigated the effects of this injection on the reproductive organs or on the carcinogenicity or toxicology of this intervention in the human body. This makes the governments COVID injection policy an experiment on the human population that is in violation of all medical ethics guidelines for doctors and all international human rights covenants that Australia has ratified.

  3. A health policy that promotes an invasive medical procedure must be proven to promote ‘health’ before it is mandated in healthy people and presented as a health policy. This injection has not been proven to promote health in the recipients, and due to the low risk from COVID disease for all healthy people, the government has not been proven that it is necessary for all professions to have this injection. Further, there have not been any clinical trials in humans to establish an evidence-based risk/benefit analysis. There is no proven benefit for taking this vaccine and this risk/benefit analysis requires a minimum of ten years of data to establish whether there are benefits that override the overwhelming risks of this injection that are being observed globally by government regulators, including the Australian TGA (>556 deaths and >61,000 vaccine injuries in just six months).

  4. Government regulators in all countries are documenting overwhelming evidence of harm and hundreds of thousands of deaths in people who have received COVID injections. This medical intervention cannot be ruled out as a cause of these deaths and chronic illnesses. These adverse health outcomes (AE’s) and deaths are acknowledged by governments globally to represent only 1-10% of the actual adverse health outcomes because of the voluntary reporting systems that are used by governments and also due to the latent effect of months or years for AE’s to develop in the recipients. For example, autoimmune diseases and cancers that are known adverse health outcomes after vaccination and listed on the package inserts for all vaccines, including the COVID injection.

  5. In the thirty years that the Australian government’s national childhood immunisation program has expanded, using financial coercion for both doctors and patients, the health of children has significantly declined. The Australian government does not promote vaccination policies on the improved health outcomes of children because they can’t. In 2021 approximately 50% of children 1-14 years of age now have a chronic illness that affects their quality of life. Unless the government can provide evidence of the improvements in health that vaccines are providing then these policies are not ‘health’ policies. Governments are falsely promoting these policies to the public as health policies if they cannot provide evidence that vaccines are not causing the 5-fold increase in chronic illnesses that are being observed in this generation of children and that are listed as being plausibly caused by vaccines in the medical literature.

  6. The suppression of scientific debate on the true risks and benefits of vaccines is being controlled by the Australian Health Practitioners Regulatory Association (AHPRA) and the corporate-sponsored mainstream media. This board for medical regulation is preventing medical doctors from discussing all the medical literature on the risks of vaccines by labelling these risks as “anti-vaccination” material. The same strategy is used by the media to influence public behaviour on vaccines.

The risk / benefit assessment of vaccines has been replaced by the emotional arguments and use of the word “antivaxxer”. This is bullying and intimidating people into using any drug that is labelled a ‘vaccine’ without questioning it. Further, doctors who discuss the risks of vaccines from the full body of medical literature (and not just from their pharmaceutically funded education) are threatened with de-registration. Yet the risks of vaccines are linked to individual genetics and people are pre-disposed to genetic illnesses. This is the science of epigenetics.

This situation is forcing doctors to promote the government’s coercive vaccination programs first (without providing supported evidence) and their patient’s best interest second: a violation of their medical ethical guidelines as stated by the Medical Board of Australia. AHPRA guidelines are preventing doctors from providing advice about drugs with respect to the patient’s own circumstances and family genetics, if these drugs are called ‘vaccines.’ This is resulting in a crime against the population because it is causing an unknown number of deaths and harm in the population without any proven health benefits to the population.

This is an experiment on the population and all individuals should refuse this jab until doctors are free to discuss the medical literature, without the threat of de-registration, and with conclusive evidence that the injection will benefit their own health as well as the health of the community.

3,139 views29 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page