If even Quebec sees this pushback to the Covid-19 agenda, something is really changing in a fundamental way, I hope: "An open letter to the College of Physicians of Quebec and the General Directorate of Public Health of Quebec" (2022.10.19).
Concerning the information to which parents are entitled in order to authorize or not the injection for their child of an mRNA-based gene product in Phase III testing
- The personal and unavoidable duty of the physician, enshrined in his code of ethics, and from which he cannot escape, requires him to ensure that free and informed consent is obtained from the patient
- Free means without threat or constraint and, in the case of an investigational pharmaceutical product, without any promotion
- Informed means that the patient receives truthful, factual, complete, and clearly expressed information
- Physicians also have an ethical duty to report public health situations about which they believe the public is poorly protected and/or poorly informed
Obligation to inform, Informed consent
- Before prescribing or giving a treatment or drug, the doctor, the government or Public Health has an ethical and legal obligation to provide the person with all the information relating to the product concerned
- Freedom of choice
- Informed choice: no information should be hidden
- Parent Consent and Responsibilities
- All available information (potential advantages and disadvantages, risks, uncertainties) must be provided and transmitted in understandable language
- Children are not able to understand the information transmitted for consent to be considered truly "informed".
Summary
- This mRNA injection is a product that has never been used on a large scale in humans and is totally different from all the vaccines we have been used to.
- Manufacturers' studies in children did not meet minimum criteria validity (necessity, effectiveness, and safety).
- The risks of myocarditis are undeniable and the substance injected can cause various damage to the heart and all the organs where the toxic Spike protein can become lodged.
- Long-term side effects include s*p spreading throughout the body, inflammation, and organ damage including the brain.
Is it scientifically justified to tell the public that messenger RNA inoculation against COVID-19 is a "vaccine like any other"?
- Have the precautionary principle (Primum, non no nocere) and the obligation of free and informed consent without threat, coercion or promotion been suspended under the health emergency law which surrounded the COVID–19 pandemic? If yes, specify.
Is it scientifically justified to be concerned about the many known or potential side effects of this investigational gene drug product?
- What do you think of the cases of Denmark and the United Kingdom which not only gave up, but prohibited the vaccination of healthy children? What would their motives be? Why is it different here? What lesson can we draw from this?
Free consent
- Can we speak of free consent in the context of the announcement, in the spring of 2021, of a vaccination percentage to be achieved by secondary school so that extracurricular activities take place at the start of the school year
- All this being obviously associated to intense group pressure by peers and teachers, without family physicians being able to express themselves freely?
- How do you justify, from a health point of view, the imposition of vaccination passport for all adolescents?
https://live2fightanotherday.substack.com/p/strongest-bastion-of-covid-19-agenda
No comments:
Post a Comment