free counter

Experts With Feet of Clay: The Push for Vaccine Mandates While Shunning Fair Debate


Because the arrival of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus in Canada, the provinces and the government have deployed a bunch of health measures to regulate the declared pandemic (confinements, masks, social distancing, curfews, etc.). State control in addition has manifested itself in the systematic denigration of early treatments with generic molecules proven effective and safe to pave just how for the most well-liked pharma solution of genetic vaccines, the efficacy and safety which are questionable to state minimal.

Being among the most liberticidal measures set up to obtain us through the desert of the COVID-19 pandemic, the vaccine mandates are in the very best of the list. This is disguised beneath the cloak of varied vaccination obligations, including those imposed on authorities employees and all Canadian citizens for public transport outside and inside Canada. You might then be eligible for expect these extraordinary measures of large-scale social engineering will be predicated on solid scientific evidence. Instead, we discover the mirage of vaccination, which just like a magic wand was to wipe away the pandemic forever.

Probably the most lucid recognize that this famous magic wand was just a decoy. A shiny object that needed to be purchased at all costs and at full speed on the premise that revolutionary new technology of gene vaccines will be superior to the natural immunity which has resolved all the epidemics because the beginning of humanity. Really?

Im old enough to keep in mind a period when viewing natural immunity being an effective bulwark against infectious disease wasnt discredited as a conspiracy theory. Those that declare that the protection conferred by these spike proteins targeted genetic vaccines will be higher than the natural immunity contrary to the whole virus caused by infection with successive variants, like the different Omicron variants, have the responsibility of proof.

Needless to say, natural infection carries certain risks, specifically for probably the most vulnerable, but vaccination isn’t without risk either, especially throughout a pandemic. The toll of individual risks connected with gene vaccines is worrying enough that thousands of doctors and scientists all over the world are calling for the suspension of general vaccination, and for that reason of its disguised obligation. Thereby, unlike what’s claimed by some politicians, the refusal of the experimental injections isn’t without scientific and ethical foundations.

Unless one is dumbfounded by the info on the THE WORLD in Data site or one will not grasp what the info indicates, doesn’t it seem obvious that certain observes a confident correlation between vaccination rates and cases of infection around the globe? Probably the most vaccinated countries have higher infection rates compared to the least vaccinated countries. It had been said to be another way around!

I’ve previously substantiated, with supporting sources, the weakness of the scientific foundations of the vaccine mandate and my analysis has been corroborated by way of a host of documents made by the Canadian Covid Care Alliance, a collective of Canadian scientists who questioned most of the health measures.

Confronted with successive waves of variants, including specifically Delta in the summertime of 2021, and also the series, which seems endless, of the various Omicron variants which began last November, the narrative that gene vaccines were likely to prevent infection and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has definitely collapsed. The final bulwark of the thesis is that vaccination will prevent more serious forms of the condition and reduce mortality. Perhaps this is true for the Delta variant, at the very least temporarily, and for probably the most vulnerable individuals, nonetheless it remains to be proven true for the Omicron variants.

One of the most fervent protagonists of the vaccination campaign, including Dr. Deborah Birx, White House adviser for the management of the pandemic, now notice that several experts had overestimated the virtues of gene vaccines in stopping the pandemicadmitting they knew right away these vaccines weren’t likely to significantly prevent infection or transmission.

Realizing that only older people and those experiencing comorbidities are truly at an increased risk, may be the taking of experimental injections for possible individual and temporary protection sufficient justification to market the generalized vaccination of a population, whose risks of disease are highly variable? Can we legitimately miss the individual assessment of the benefit/risk balance?

The Canadian State has promulgated the vaccine mandates in the general public service and transport, due to the fact it has very solid scientific bases to justify these draconian measures unprecedented inside our history. The validity of the mandates was challenged in a lawsuit brought notably by the Hon. Brian Peckford, former premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, with additional plaintiffs.

Reading the affidavits and cross-examinations of the trial reveals a bunch of shortcomings in the scientific tests cited along with sinking into extrapolations, interpretations, and speculations with shaky scientific foundations. Not forgetting having less ethical considerations. We are able to and must highlight these shortcomings and hope that they can be formally established in the courts.

Nonetheless it isn’t easy once the representatives of the institutions set up elude any scientific debate. This matter was taken to light in some articles recently published in The Epoch Times by No Chartier.

It really is distressing to notice the reduced scientific calibre of government technocrats and bureaucrats who’ve not demonstrated their capability to produce scientific knowledge through rigorous, long-term research. Not forgetting their shortcomings in discerning flaws in the scientific literature generally, and in neuro-scientific health specifically. This makes them highly susceptible to corporate ideology and Big Pharma propaganda. We have been still searching for encouraging signs that, in the lack of a scientific culture worth the name with a good foundation in epistemology, they might have at the very least developed good critical thinking. We search, but we usually do not find reassuring clues. Many navigate the troubled waters of incompetence, occasionally stranding themselves on the reefs of bad faith.

The largest problem in these government institutions looking for reform isn’t having less competent, dedicated, and well-meaning people. I understand there are numerous from having encountered them within my 35 years of service at the National Research Council of Canada. The essential problem, as in virtually any organization with ineffective governance, may be the insufficient accountability, the current presence of perverse incentives for promotion, compliance, and blind loyalty to its bosses. These faults are rarely appropriate for rigour, probity, and scientific excellence.

What the court cross-examinations continue revealing is this insufficient accountability at the best levelsespecially with politicians, who allow themselves to flout the Charter of Rights and Freedoms should they feel they are able to escape the legal, media, or electoral consequences, as well as benefit from them. Most of them have lost their moral compass in the magnetic field of ideology which has confused them for a long time. Professionals in the machinery of government are simply the useful idiots in this story, collateral, albeit willing, victims of the machine.

We should continue steadily to confront these leaders to unmask their incompetence. As is seen within their evasive answers and their prevarications, they will have not been promoted by demonstrating their capability to debate based on scientific knowledge, but by their capability to formulate a note that may please their superiors and that most importantly avoid embarrassing them by exposing their ignorance. We have been witnessing a systematic instrumentalization of science misguided into scientism, as before the power set up instrumentalized religious belief.

So long as we usually do not set up robust firewalls to avoid the misappropriation of science for ideological political ends, we shall remain stuck in this drift of Lysenkoism that may lead us ultimately to the collapse of the institutions. One cannot cheat the laws of nature indefinitely without suffering the results. In fact it is particularly in these moments of crisis that people realize that we need to change things and prevent ignoring what nature teaches us.

Hawaii apparatus doesn’t have a monopoly on scientific knowledge, and all too often in the general public service, promotion to decision-making positions is situated more on compliance with a particular doxa instrumentalized by politicians. This is simply not only a problem at the provincial or federal level, it has been widespread around the world for most decades.

Each time you hear professionals say, consider questions. Which experts? What’s their credibility? Are they clear of conflicts of interest? Are they ready to fairly debate the foundation of these expert opinion? And when they’re not prepared to debate, for the reason that we are coping with experts with feet of clay, impostors created by the technocratic system. We have been rather coping with a Zelig.

Views expressed in this post will be the opinions of the writer , nor necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Bernard Massie


Bernard Massie, Ph.D., graduated in microbiology and immunology from the University of Montreal in 1982 and completed a three-year postdoctoral fellowship at McGill University studying DNA tumor viruses. He worked at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) from 1985 to 2019 as a biotechnology researcher and held various management positions, like the position of Acting Director General of the Therapeutics in Human Health Center from 2016 to 2019. He’s got devoted a substantial section of his career to the development of integrated bioprocesses for the industrial production of therapeutic antibodies and adenovirus vaccines. He was also a co-employee professor in the department of microbiology and immunology at the University of Montreal from 1998 to 2019. He could be currently an unbiased consultant in biotechnology.

Read More

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top button

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker