A Note of Caution about Covid-19 Vaccines

A Note of Caution about Covid-19 Vaccines

I want to personally reach out with some facts and insights on Covid-19 vaccines to help you make the most informed decision about getting vaccinated. This is contrary advice to many other people in the volunteer travel industry who see the vaccines as a green light to start moving around the globe again. Some of these people even support digital vaccine passports, which will restrict travel and civil liberties (e.g. freeze the unvaccinated out of travel and normal life altogether). I hope Covid-19 testing will be part of the hassle of travelling for the foreseeable future, rather than imposing mandatory vaccination as a pre-requisite for air travel. Young people are getting strong-armed into getting vaccinated despite the tiny risk of becoming seriously ill from Covid, but I recommend they play the waiting game until more data is available (e.g. allow more time to see how the situation unfolds). For the purpose of this article I will focus on the Pfizer/BioNTech and Oxford University/AstraZeneca vaccines and use statistical data from the United Kingdom (UK) government. I am not wishing to pick a fight with anyone and would rather avoid a backlash, but some things have to be said. I just want to give my opinion on this contentious issue and briefly explain why you should be very cautious on Covid-19 vaccines. Pay attention to actual evidence and the potential consequences of having the vaccine, rather than mass hysteria. If you do your research you will understand Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy and why you should refrain from making a mad dash to the closest vaccination centre. Of course it is your body and your choice, but there are things you need to know about the Covid-19 vaccines.

Adverse Reactions and Deaths

Have you ever tried to find vaccine adverse events data and wondered why the media rarely talks about this matter? I am sure Boris Johnson and his "expert" advisers know about the vaccine adverse effects so this might explain why the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) Yellow Card stats are buried at the bottom of this web page. Click on 'Vaccine Analysis Profile - Pfizer/BioNTech' and 'Vaccine Analysis Profile - Oxford University/AstraZeneca.' Here are the stats at the time of writing. Total reactions for the Covid-19 mRNA Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in the UK between 9/12/20 and 14/04/21: 334 deaths and 143,034 injuries. Total reactions for the Covid-19 Oxford University/AstraZeneca vaccine in the UK between 04/01/21 and 14/04/2021: 627 deaths and 548,495 injuries. The UK Government’s reporting system for coronavirus (covid-19) vaccine adverse reactions currently reports a total of 961 deaths and 691,529 injuries for these two Covid vaccines. Notice the wide range of adverse reactions for both vaccines, from nervous system disorders to eye disorders. It is no wonder some doctors around the world have been desperately trying to warn people about the devastating effects of the Covid vaccines. The most important thing to note is that many people don't report vaccine adverse effects so the total reactions are likely to be much higher for both vaccines. The MHRA itself says that only 10% of serious reactions and 2–4% of all reactions are reported using the Yellow Card Scheme. In the United States (US) fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported via the national Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), co-managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Is the European database that tracks reports of deaths and injuries following the Covid-19 vaccines, EudraVigilance, similarly under-reporting deaths and injuries? EudraVigilance is reporting 6,662 deaths and 299,065 injuries up to 10/4/21, following injections of four Covid-19 jabs (Moderna, Pfizer/BioNTech, AstraZeneca and Janssen). We are looking at some serious numbers and massive under-reporting in the UK but the British media is silent. More accurately, the mainstream media is actively downplaying the adverse effects of the vaccines. Why? For starters, most media outlets in the UK now rely on advertising revenue from government, so if they do not toe the line will lose an important source of revenue. The BBC and The Guardian have both received funding from The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which provides a large proportion of the World Health Organization's (WHO) funds. I would argue that the BBC and Guardian are serving the UK Government, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Pharmaceutical Industry and WHO. This is why there has been no honest discussion about possible adverse effects and deaths to date. The global pharmaceutical industry funds and influences what the media says all over the world (70% of news advertising in the US comes from pharmaceutical companies). Ask yourself how many times you have heard the BBC or Guardian talk about UK government data or the website for reporting adverse drug reactions (e.g. the Yellow Card Scheme)? All the media does is constantly seek to terrify us into a state of servile fear, demoralise us, and coerce us into taking an experimental corporate vaccine. I cannot remember any other vaccine in history where you had to break the spirit of people and use psychological warfare tactics to encourage people to have it.

Vaccination Experiment

At the Covid-19 Symposium 2021 in Ontario, Canada, Dr Byram Bridle, Viral Immunologist, University of Guelph, stated, "those being vaccinated now are, whether they realize it or not - part of the phase three experiment. They're part of a vaccination experiment. And the companies have openly acknowledged this in their reports to the regulatory agencies." James Corbett summed up the situation perfectly when he stated, "the people rushing to take these experimental, never before approved for human use, not properly safety tested mRNA vaccines, are literally human guinea pigs, volunteering to be experimented on." As you are aware we are strong advocates for volunteering but as a guinea pig for vaccine manufacturers? When there has been minimal testing and there are no long-term studies, there is no way Pfizer or AstraZeneca can say mRNA vaccines are proven to be safe. Most clinical trials are funded by pharmaceutical companies! UK regulators granted emergency-use authorization for the vaccines from Pfizer/BioNTech and Oxford University/AstraZeneca. Likewise, the vaccines are not "FDA approved" in the US and are on the market for emergency use only. The quickest vaccine developed prior to Covid-19 was the mumps vaccine in 1967 which took 4 years to create. That was an exception, vaccine development is typically a long, complex process, often lasting 10-15 years. The Covid-19 vaccines have taken less than a year to develop and come onto the market. Only one word comes to mind and that is "rushed" and this is understandably making many people nervous about vaccine safety.

Immune from Liability

If you have read this far, it should be quite clear why Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers were given immunity from liability. The vaccine manufacturers want no liability for deaths and injuries resulting from their products. They do not know the long-term effects of their products. The vaccine manufacturers have been allowed to create a rushed one-size-fits-all product, yet they are unwilling to accept any responsibility for any deaths or injuries their products cause. Does that fill you with confidence? If your product was safe you would be willing to stand behind it. You cannot trust any product with no liability. All vaccine manufacturers have paid out billions of dollars as compensation in damages for other products they brought to market. Often knowing those products would cause deaths and injuries (Dengvaxia, Bextra, Celebrex, Thalidomide, etc). The mRNA vaccine manufacturers including Pfizer/BioNTech and Oxford University/AstraZeneca, and their close allies such as Bill Gates, are clearly playing fast and loose with human lives in their rush to get these experimental vaccines into our bodies.

Ineffective Vaccines

One quote I remember distinctly from 2020 was from Dr Anthony Fauci (key advisor to the White House and Department of Health and Human Services) when he stated, "the initial Covid-19 vaccines will prevent symptoms in those who become infected with the coronavirus rather than kill the virus itself." Is it worth having a rushed, experimental and inadequately tested mRNA vaccine to prevent symptoms? A vaccine that does not prevent infection or transmission of the virus? A vaccine that does not exclude you from lockdown, social distancing or wearing a face mask? Paracetamol would reduce symptoms! Ask anyone who has had one of the vaccines if their life has returned to normal? People are testing positive for Covid-19 after being vaccinated! A vaccine that does not stop infection or transmission sounds to me like a corporate profits gravy train. It will not be just a jab and then a second dose, it will be a lifetime of jabs. Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla recently stated people will “likely” need a third dose of a Covid-19 vaccine within 12 months of getting fully vaccinated. He also said it’s possible people will need to get vaccinated against the coronavirus annually. Ineffective vaccines provide the excuse to keep all restrictive measures in place (e.g. social distancing, face masks, etc).

Boost Your Immune System

After the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq, many service members came down with 'Gulf War Syndrome' It was later determined to be caused by the anthrax vaccine. That was a vaccine developed on a normal time frame. Surely, it is easy to understand why I am concerned about a rushed, experimental vaccine, with no liability for manufacturers? This is not crazy anti-vax logic, but a clear demonstration of common sense. Other vaccines have made an enormous contribution to global health but I am enormously sceptical about the Covid-19 vaccines. It is a case of weighing-up the risks and benefits of the vaccines. In the UK the survival rate for my age group is 99.8%. Why would I take a risk on a product to help me overcome a virus with a 0.2% chance of killing me? Some people will say the survival rate is somewhere between 99% and 99.5% because of the number of people who have died of Covid-19; however, we cannot rely on the number of registered Covid-19 deaths in the UK (Covid-19 recorded as a cause on the death certificate). New data in the UK shows that around a quarter of the deaths attributed to Covid-19 were not caused by the virus. I believe the real number of deaths from just Covid is much lower than indicated by this data, and the UK government has been inflating the numbers since the beginning of the so-called pandemic. I am not going to expand on this particular point because this article is about the Covid-19 vaccines, but let's just say Covid death statistics and the PCR test both provide smoking gun evidence of pandemic fraud. All I hope is that justice is served and the truth comes out. Anyway, if you likewise think it is a good idea to play the waiting game, invest your time in strengthening your immune system. All the vast majority of people need to do is live a healthy lifestyle (e.g., good diet, regular exercise, etc). It really is the only way to ensure true health and longevity. Your immune system gives you much better odds of surviving Covid-19 without having to play Russian roulette with your health through experimental vaccines with 95% (at best) and 76% (at worst) efficacy. In official documents released by the UK government, models for the planned "third wave" of Covid-19 predicted that any hospitalizations and deaths would be "dominated" by people who had already been vaccinated (page 10). The statement reflects the growing discussion on the significant amount of deaths and adverse effects after Covid-19 jabs.

Trust The Science?

We have had over a year of intense propaganda and gaslighting by government and mass media, so I do understand why some people are a little punch-drunk. The public have been 'conditioned' to believe the narrative about 'infection' rates and 'cases’ but the majority of these positive PCR tests are false positives and as such are not real 'infections' or 'cases.' In a podcast from July 2020 (titled: This Week In Virology 641: Covid-19 with Dr Anthony Fauci), Dr Anthony Fauci admitted that the PCR Covid test is useless and misleading when the test is run at "35 cycles or higher." A positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted, or believed. This has been confirmed by many experts in the field and many articles have been written about the topic. The New York Times article headlined “Your coronavirus test is positive. Maybe it shouldn’t be.” said most tests set the limit at 40 cycles, a few at 37. Even the inventor of the PCR process, Dr Kary Mullis, warned it was not meant as a diagnostic tool, saying, "with PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody.” Despite all this the PCR test has been run at 40, 45 and even 50 cycles in laboratories around the world. The National Health Service (NHS) guideline document says the PCR test is being run at 45 amplification cycles in the UK (page 16). The FDA and CDC in the US recommends the test should be run up to 40 cycles. Therefore, all laboratories that are following NHS/FDA/WHO guidelines are knowingly or unknowingly participating in fraud. Millions of people are being told they are infected with the virus based on a false positive result. Lockdowns and other restraining measures are based on these fraudulent case numbers. Basically, you can generate any result you want by adjusting the amplification cycles. Fauci has been aware of this enormous fraud but has done nothing to stop it. Interestingly, a WHO guidance memo in December 2020 stated that high cycle thresholds on PCR tests will result in false positives. Why suddenly acknowledge this problem when it has been public knowledge since the beginning of the so-called pandemic? It is of no coincidence their memo appeared just as the vaccines were starting to roll-out. I hope you can see how the WHO can steer the narrative, depending on vaccine uptake. If everyone gets fully vaccinated it is not beyond the realms of possibility that WHO will publish new guidelines recommending tests run at 25-30 cycles instead of 35+. If the amplification cycles are lowered, what will happen to the reported case numbers, and what will they claim is working? Hail the 'miracle' jab! If masses of people refuse the vaccine it is feasible the amplification cycles will climb (35+ cycles) to maintain the pandemic narrative and justification for lockdown and Covid restrictions. A shockingly cynical take but a plausible scenario and pathway. We shall see how this plays out. Whatever happens, never forget the weirdest and most damaging year we have collectively experienced (e.g., through lockdowns and other draconian measures) involved fake science. I know there are people out there who know something is wrong even if they cannot put their finger on it. Trust your instincts. The PCR test only goes partway down the Covid rabbit hole.


Stephanie Broster
Added 12th July 2021

The vaccines use genetics and biotechnology and thus cause irreversible changes. Am not an anti-vaxxer but these vaccines concern me greatly.

Caroline Turner
Added 13th May 2021

I've had one jab and don't want to have any more now I've found out more, will this wear off in time?

Post your comments

Please fix all highlighted errors

Please tick the reCaptcha box