The following article was written by Oliver May and was published by The Daily Expose on May 1, 2021. It features a (now censored) statement from Doctors for Covid Ethics, the same group who warned the European Medicines Agency (EMA) of blood clots from COVID injections and who sent out the notices of liability to all members of the European parliament [see Members of European parliament served with Notice of Liability for COVID injection adverse effects and deaths].
According to the statement, the organization stressed that the COVID injections do not prevent infection and transmission, and that urging people to vaccinate “in order to protect others” has no basis in fact. The doctors assert that vaccines are dangerous to healthy individuals and those with pre-existing diseases. They say, “the risk-benefit calculus is therefore clear: the experimental vaccines are needless, ineffective and dangerous. Actors authorising, coercing or administering experimental COVID-19 vaccination are exposing populations and patients to serious, unnecessary, and unjustified medical risks.”
The authors say that fear-mongering over variants is overblown and unjustified. They also remind authorities that the vaccines are still experimental, “They will remain in Phase 3 trials until 2023. Recipients are human subjects entitled to free informed consent under Nuremberg and other protections, including the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe’s resolution 2361 and the FDA’s terms of emergency use authorisation.” Implementing vaccine passports is equal to coercion and a violation of the Nuremberg Code.
Editor’s Note: Despite all the credentials of the doctors who signed this statement from Doctors for Covid Ethics, it was still censored because it did not conform to the narrative being pushed. It doesn’t matter that this group was right in projecting the possibility of blood clotting issues due to the vaccine. The decades of work done by the professionals who are part of the Doctors for Covid Ethics have been disregarded by Medium. Their right to free academic discourse has been curtailed.
Now tell us, is this still science?
Click the button below if you wish to read the article on the website where it was originally published.
Click the button below if you wish to read the article offline.