246 vaccinated residents diagnosed with COVID; 3 dead, Michigan reports
(www.detroitnews.com)
? DEM PANIC ?
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (65)
sorted by:
Thank you for sharing this - my daughter is having a tough time at her work, being the only one opposed to getting the jab, and she needs ammunition to counter their stupidity with. This and the WA state article are doing her some good - I appreciate it!
None of the jabs are FDA approved vaccines. They are under Emergency Use Authorization only. The public is part of phase 4 FDA testing of these medical devices for final FDA approval. The earliest the studies are set to conclude is fall of next year. It could be several years before all the data is then analyzed and final FDA approval is sought. With complete immunity for financial liability - pun intended - why would these manufacturers be in any hurry to seek final approval? They are in a complete win win situation here. All profit and no liability.
The public is being used in the largest study ever conducted in order to evaluate these jabs. Not only is the study unprecedented, but the technology being utilized has never been used on human subjects before - ever. All of the previous animal studies done in an attempt to develop a coronavirus vaccine proved disasterous. This is why the normal animal testing used for Emergency Use Authorization was bypassed under the protection of Warp Speed. The jabs were then rushed to production and forced onto the public by coercive means and propaganda. The public is not being truly informed of the risks and theoretical benefits of this experimentation.
Here is the bottom line. The key to refusal lies within informed consent. Laws governing informed consent are contained in the framework of the Nuremberg Code which later became codified within US's own laws on informed consent. Most people are not even being given written informed consent forms. Why? The drug manufacturers cannot give the FDA guidance for this information because at this point it is only theoretical computer modeling. There cannot be any informed consent, whether oral or written, about the risks and benefits simply because they do not know - it is still being determined. This is medical experimentation - period. Therefore, anyone has the right to refuse to participate in a medical experiment by not only US law, but international as well.
Here are the questions one must ask of the one requesting your cooperation:
Is this vaccine FDA approved? (They cannot answer anything but no.)
Is this vaccine experimental? (The answer cannot be anything but yes.)
Can you tell me what the risks of this experimental vaccine are? (In honesty they will not be able to give you a complete list of possible adverse reactions and no one has the right to force you to submit to experimentation.)
Say... no thank you... I do not wish to participate in this experiment.
45 CFR § 46.116 - General requirements for informed consent.
I couldn't have said that better myself - awesome post! Very informative! :)
I hope this helps simplify things for you and your daughter. I am in heath care myself and I did study some law. Even though I did not pursue a career in law, the knowledge was not wasted. It has helped me navigate the minefield.
We cannot come off like "antivaxers" if we are going to have a chance at fighting this. We must work within the system and not against it. Like in martial arts, we use the energy being directed at us and deflect it thereby using that same energy against our opponent. A full on frontal attack against this issue using the typical antivaxxer rhetoric is not going to be successful.
There is a reason why they are using the language they are to confuse things - such as calling a jab a vaccine while the manufacturer has it classified and patented as a medical device. Human beings have a tendency to take purposefully vague language and fill in the blanks themselves based upon their own bias. Like politicians, the top of the public health food chain can never speak in terms of the concrete but only in speculative generalities that can sound factual to the untrained ear. They allow the public to come to their own conclusions - conclusions that are carefully directed towards predetermined outcomes. If the fight is based on argumentation against vaccines, where they are trying to direct us, the fight is lost before it has begun. The discussion needs to be deflected from argumentation against vaccines to something else. In this case, it is informed consent.
We must help each other that are trying to save ourselves and the ones we care about. I only post on this board because I know there are those seeking truth to begin with - that is why they are here. Take what you learn and share it. Thank you.
Will do - thanks again! :) Stay safe, fren!
Here are a few extra calibers to add to that arsenal. God be with you both: https://greatawakening.win/p/12i48c49Bb/x/c/4DzeCMgdv6m
Thank you! :)