I found this post in the comments section of a Zero Hedge article that discusses USA Today‘s decision to scrub an article that suggests people who have been vaccinated now pose a threat to healthy people because we (the vaccinated) are more infectious.
This is a growing sound in America. We are headed for doom if we don’t pay attention to articles like this:
For those who had hoped the worst of the pandemic was over, this may actually be only the beginning, despite the fact that COVID is no longer a threat.’
The penalties take many forms, among them:
• Using guilt and shame to make unvaccinated children and adults feel badly about themselves for refusing the Vaccines.
• Threatening the unvaccinated with false fears and anxieties about COVID-19, especially children who are at no risk statistically.
• Removing the rights of those who are unvaccinated, including:
o Being prohibited from working
o Being prohibited from attending school or college
o Being limited in the ability to travel in buses, trains and planes
o Being prohibited from traveling outside the United States
o Being excluded from public and private events, such as performing arts venues.
Most recently, the President has announced an aggressive campaign to visit the homes of the unvaccinated, not for the purpose of ensuring that they have all of the information they might need in order to make fully informed, voluntary decisions about the Vaccines (the information required by § 360bbb–3(e)(1)(A)(i) and (ii)), but instead for the purpose of pressuring them to be injected with the Vaccine so that the Administration can reach its goal of having 70% of the American population vaccinated. He said: “Now we need to go to community by community, neighborhood by neighborhood, and oftentimes, door to door — literally knocking on doors — to get help to the remaining people protected from the virus.” The White House press secretary referred to the door-knockers who would enter our communities to pressure us to accept the Vaccines using the language of war, as “strike forces.” Then, after Dr. Fauci stated his opinion in mainstream media news outlets that “at the local level . . . there should be more mandates, there really should be”, the press secretary announced that the Biden Administration would support state and local Vaccine mandates.
A study recently published in the International Journal of Clinical Practice, “Informed Consent Disclosure to Vaccine Trial Subjects of Risk of COVID-19 Vaccines Worsening Clinical Disease,”22 concludes:
COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the developmentand testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.
Plaintiffs’ expert Dr. Lee Merritt is a fully licensed, board certified surgeon, and has been actively engaged in medical practice for over 35 years. As Chief of Staff, Chief of Surgery and Chief of Credentialing at a regional medical center, she participated in hospital administration and education with respect to inter alia informed consent. She states: “I have read the Complaint and Motion for Preliminary Injunction in the above captioned matter, specifically the allegations related to informed consent. I agree with the informed consent allegations contained in the Complaint and Motion for Preliminary Injunction” (see Declaration of Dr. Lee Merritt at Exhibit A). Dr. Merritt has provided an example of some of the language that she would recommend using for the purpose of obtaining voluntary, informed consent to the Vaccines.
The combined effect of (i) the suppression and censorship of information regarding the risks of the Vaccines, (ii) the failure to inform the public regarding the novel and experimental nature of the mRNA Vaccines, (iii) the suppression and censorship of information regarding alternative treatments, (iv) the failure to inform and properly educate the public that the Vaccines are not in fact “approved” by the FDA, (v) the failure to inform and properly educate the public that the DHHS Secretary has not determined that the Vaccines are “safe and effective” and on the contrary has merely determined that “it is reasonable to believe” that the Vaccines “may be effective” and that the benefits outweigh the risks, (vi) the sustained psychological manipulation of the public through official fear-based messaging regarding COVID-19, draconian countermeasures and a system of rewards and penalties, is to remove any possibility that Vaccine recipients are giving voluntary informed consent to the Vaccines. They have no real option to accept or refuse the Vaccines. They are unwitting, unwilling participants in a large scale, ongoing non-consensual human experiment.