Those who agreed to wearing a face mask, despite everyone being able to claim a health-exemption, will now agree to anything. And that was the purpose of the mask mandate, to unmask and quantify the weakness of character in our population. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3840787

Sign and Share. This is a powerful message, not just a petition. Tell them that you understand the law of this State: https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/council/petitions/electronic-petitions/view-e-petitions/details/12/374

The following is a description of my digital currency concept, based on the principle of fair money; the only non-parasitic currency ever designed. https://culturalanalysisnet.wordpress.com/2018/12/04/introduction-to-robust-secured-crypto-currency/

Federal Petition drafted by an expert in medical ethics to prohibit vaccine passports or any discrimination on the basis of vaccination status. SIGN and SHARE: https://www.aph.gov.au/e-petitions/petition/EN2939

My Second Email to SPC regarding mandatory Covid vaccination of employees.

Good Morning,

Requiring your employees to participate in a vaccine death-lottery is not compatible with human rights and safety of those who would die because of this injection.

Even if more lives would be saved on account of universal Covid vaccination, mandating human sacrifice of the unlucky few for the benefit of the many is a direct violation of the fundamental human right: the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of life. Any law that would purport to legitimise such an action is void, because it undermines the conditions of its own authority.

Ignorance of this fundamental ethic was never considered a valid excuse, and extreme punitive measures were historically applied in response, irrespective of what the perpetrators believed to be ‘legal’.

As I said before, as a subject-matter expert, you are on the verge of becoming complicit in a crime against humanity.

Please choose wisely,

Michael Kowalik



On 8 Aug 2021, at 10:38 am, SPC Customer Care <customercare@spc.com.au> wrote:

Hi,

Thank you for sharing your concerns.

We remain committed to aligning our practices with the Human Rights Act and Federal and State Discrimination Laws and will review any employee requests for exemptions regarding vaccination on a case-by-case basis.

We are encouraging all our SPC staff to have a discussion with their GP about the best choice for them. If any staff member has a pre-existing condition that may affect their vaccine eligibility, they are encouraged to discuss this with our people and culture team.

At SPC we ensure our people’s health and safety, job security, as well as business continuity for the essential service we provide to the broader community and the country.

We hope you and your family stay safe.

Best wishes,

SPC Customer Care

The relative risk of death for the vaccinated is 12.5% higher than for the unvaccinated, according to Pfizer’s own 6 month safety and efficacy review. 18 deaths among the vaccinated; vs 16 among the unvaccinated. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v1

Proposed legislation in NSW aims to make anyone imposing the vaccine requirement on their workers to be fully liable for any injury or loss caused by the vaccine. Employers should be cautious, because a law like this passed in the future may apply retrospectively: https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bill/files/3835/First%20Print.pdf

Ethics of Vaccine Refusal
Journal of Medical Ethics (2021)

Proponents of vaccine mandates typically claim that everyone who can be vaccinated has a moral or ethical obligation to do so for the sake of those who cannot be vaccinated, or in the interest of public health. I evaluate several previously undertheorised premises implicit to the ‘obligation to vaccinate’ type of arguments and show that the general conclusion is false: there is neither a moral obligation to vaccinate nor a sound ethical basis to mandate vaccination under any circumstances, even for hypothetical vaccines that are medically risk-free. Agent autonomy with respect to self-constitution has absolute normative priority over reduction or elimination of the associated risks to life. In practical terms, mandatory vaccination amounts to discrimination against healthy, innate biological characteristics of the human race.

https://ssrn.com/abstract=3793981

My opinion on vaccines.

Vaccines are irreversible, biotechnological enhancements intended for healthy people that could never occur naturally (more on this below) and therefore not healthcare (or healthy) but transhumanism. Transhumanism is in principle unhealthy, because it aims to alter the species-typical characterises on which the medical standard of human health is based. https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2021/03/30/is-transhumanism-a-health-problem/

Apart from the above, a typical vaccine consists of the target antigen/protein and an adjuvant (intended to activate the immune system to the target antigen), plus some non-target antigens - proteins retained as impurities from the manufacturing process. Any injection through the skin stimulates at least two distinct immune responses: IgE (anti-partistic) and IgG (antibodies that fight the target pathogen). IgE sensitisation can be induced by trace amounts of the antigen and typically lasts for life; IgG is relatively short lived and is induced only by higher doses of the antigen. IgE never occurs naturally to respiratory viruses, because it is an anti-parasitic, allergic immune response evolved for insect bites (injections are like insect bites). In the case of natural infection with a respiratory antigen you typically develop IgG antibodies plus T-cells (which extend the capacity to generate IgG). After receiving a vaccine that includes the same antigen, you get IgE + IgG; that is, allergic sensitisation to the viral protein (and to any other protein in the vaccine) plus some short lived IgG immunity that has to counter both the allergy and the virus itself, at the same time. These two contradictory reactions ensure that vaccines can never achieve as good immunity as a natural infection, and may also induce allergic sensitivity to any non-target antigens, including the possibility of auto-immunity. Injectable vaccines are inherently dangerous; bad medicine.

This paper includes a reasonably comprehensive bibliography on IgE sensitisation: https://www.longdom.org/open-access/evidence-that-food-proteins-in-vaccines-cause-the-development-of-food-allergies-and-its-implications-for-vaccine-policy-12461.html

Pfizer Vaccine Safety Review

I just had another read of the Pfizer/BioNTech-funded vaccine safety and efficacy review, and it turns out that all 5 additional deaths following the unblinding were among the vaccinated; 3 previously vaccinated and 2 from the placebo arm but then died only after being vaccinated. We now have 20 dead after the vaccine and 14 among the unvaccinated. The Relative Risk of Death for the Vaccinated post unblinding is (20-14)/14 = 43% more than for the unvaccinated. This is staggering, a veritable poison; its emergency authorisation should be immediately cancelled.

No wonder Pfizer were eager to destroy the control by injecting everyone; they could surely see how bad the results would look for them if they had the study going for another couple of months. But what alarms me the most is how all of a sudden some scientists ‘forgot’ what RCTs are designed to prove, and engage in speculation about various uncontrolled factors but dismiss the only controlled variable in this study (intervention vs no-intervention).

See the comments below the article; upvote the good ones; downvote the propaganda. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v1

Face Masks do not Reduce the Spread of Respiratory Viruses

Every controlled study ever concducted on the effectiveness of face masks during respiratory epidemics has shown no statistically dsignificant reduction in the spread of infection. The following meta-analysis of 14 studies was published by CDC in 2020. Nevertheless, face mask mandates were based on the non-scientific inference that just because masks capture droplets then they must reduce the spread of infection. This conclusion does not follow. Every time you cough or sneeze into a mask, some particles will indeed be captured by the mask, but the next time you sneeze or cough into the same mask, the previously captured droplets will be atomised/aerosolised and emitted outwards anyway. The mask does not make the viral particles disappear but only temporarily delays their dispersion.

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article

Now if you add hand touching to the mask, as people often do because the mask causes discomfort, you just end up spreading the same viral particles by hand. We also know that after 20 minutes bacterial cultures begin to proliferate in the mask itself, and the mask becomes a potential source of bacterial lung infection. This is indeed what happened during the Spanish flu pandemic, where most people did not die from the virus but from bacterial pneumonia. This was confirmed by a study, which had Dr. Fauci as one of the authors:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC2599911/

Irrespective of the epidemiological considerations discussed above, face masks are also psychologically damaging, undermining our sense of self and our social relations. I have discussed the relevant mechanisms here: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3840787

And then there is the famous “Still Face Experiment” by Edward Tronick: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=apzXGEbZht0

Science is Value-free. It can tell us only what is; not what ought to be. Therefore, deferring to “science” to justify “what ought to be” is at best an error, at worst a deception.

We need more fully unvaccinated volunteers to be the control group for the long term vaccine efficacy and safety study. It is a huge sacrifice to forgo the protection that vaccine gives us in the middle of the pandemic, but without unvaccinated heroes we will never know how effective these vaccines are. So please consider being part of the placebo arm of this amazing global experiment.