by Chauncey Tinker – 5 Aug 2021
Just a quick post today to react to a series of appalling articles at the BBC website. Firstly I saw this on the BBC front page:
Then I saw this from the BBC:
Then I saw this:
Obviously we don't need to look any further than this series of headlines to notice that something is very, very, wrong with the official reasoning. However since people have been brainwashed and terrified into believing just about anything during this scamdemic, I will spell it out for people - if the cases are really down then it is ridiculous to claim that there is "no time to waste" in vaccinating 16-17 year olds.
It becomes far more ridiculous, and deeply disturbing, as we read the texts of these articles however. Quote from the first article :
They will not need parental consent and will receive the Pfizer-BioNTech jab, the Joint Committee on Vaccine and Immunisation said on Wednesday.
They will "not need parental consent", and why not exactly? Alarm bells should be ringing in parents' heads when they see this next quote, because it was only a short while ago that we were being assured that ALL the vaccines were safe:
The only vaccine currently approved for under-18s in the UK is Pfizer-BioNTech.
Then the article mentions the fact that only one jab has been recommended for children for now, it seems there is some doubt about side effects:
The advice today is to give 16 and 17-year-olds their first dose and then wait for more details.
One reason is the risk of inflamed heart tissue (myocarditis or pericarditis) is higher after the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine.
Obviously we have to weigh up the relative risks of a medical treatment against the risks from whatever the treatment is designed to prevent. So what is the risk to these children from COVID-19 exactly? The article only gives the vaguest suggestion about that:
Prof Wei Shen Lim, who chairs the Covid part of the JCVI, said ... :
"While Covid-19 is typically mild or asymptomatic in most young people, it can be very unpleasant for some," he said.
What precisely does "it can be very unpleasant for some" mean? How many children are affected exactly? An earlier article from the BBC claimed that the risk to children from the illness was extremely low:
This article claimed the "absolute risk of death" was 2 in a million (and bear in mind that claims about COVID-19 deaths are dubious in the first place). Meanwhile there are increasing numbers of reports to the Yellow Card reporting system of adverse reactions and deaths occurring a short time after the vaccinations, numbers suggesting that the risk of death from the vaccines may be considerably higher than that.
So, why on earth is there "no time to waste" in this push to jab the children??? It seems we are expected to believe that children have to be vaccinated for the sake of adults, who are also at low risk from the illness in any case:
But they can act as a reservoir of virus and pass it on to their friends, classmates, families and other vulnerable adults.
Based on this logic they will next be demanding that even younger children are vaccinated. Don't jab the children, please, stop it.
What do you think? Should we jab the children to "save granny"? Please leave a comment below.