Doing otherwise would be misrepresenting an ideology as a professional judgement. There is one ethical solutions to this dilemma: openly denounce the regulator on ethical grounds and declare to every patient that you are not allowed to have an independent professional opinion on this question. It follows that any doctor administering or promoting vaccines under these conditions acts unethically.

My Open Letter to the Governor-General of Australia, General David Hurley.
Dear Governor-General,

I am a philosopher and the author of “Ethics of Vaccine Refusal” published in the BMJ Journal of Medical Ethics. https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2021/02/25/medethics-2020-107026

Several categories of Australian workers are subject to Covid-19 vaccination requirements, imposed by the state governments. Moreover, universal discrimination against the unvaccinated is on the verge of being implemented as part of the ‘new normal’.

Please consider the following moral question: Since vaccines can sometimes cause death of healthy people, then vaccine mandates are in effect a form of legal coercion to participate in an activity where a percentage of people are expected to die as a result of their coerced participation. This implies that the mandating authority violates the right to life of some people, arbitrarily killing a few healthy humans for the alleged benefit of the many. The classic name for such a barbaric arrangement is ‘human sacrifice’. How does the Governor-General feel about coerced human sacrifice of the few for the benefit of the many?

Vaccine mandates also imply that all children are born in a defective, inherently harmful state that must be technologically augmented to allow their unrestricted participation in society, and this constitutes discrimination on the basis of healthy, innate characteristics of the human race. Will the Governor-General have the courage and moral integrity to use the Sovereign Prerogative to avert this crime against humanity?

The anticoagulant drug warfarin (also used as a popular Rat Poison) is widely used to prevent and treat deep-vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, and to prevent stroke in patients who have atrial fibrillation, valvular heart disease, or a prosthetic heart valve. https://www.nature.com/articles/nrcardio.2017.172

If you are affected emotionally by something you see online, it is prudent to assume that it was intended to affect you emotionally, in order to control your behaviour. Emotion is a tactically poor basis for action.

Information is Real only when contextualised as an objective Media Event, not just the Content of the Media (the Container). Nevertheless, the Moral reality persists irrespective of the distinction between Reality and Illusion, because it is a principle of Order (the structure of meaning) that applies to both illusion and reality. For the same reason, your moral integrity in your dreams has the same normative force as your moral integrity in the real, and THIS is the metaphysical reality that ultimately matters, makes you One or breaks you Apart, into contradictory fragments - metaphysical dust.

The vaccine mandates for teachers, construction and healthcare workers are just CHO directives, ie. directives made under Emergency Powers. The parliament cannot delegate powers it does not itself possess, and even the parliament can’t infringe on citizen freedoms without passing a law to that effect by a majority vote of the parliament. The mandate, and all other CHO directives, are unlawful and void. I have condensed this argument into a formal petition to the Victorian Parliament: https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/council/petitions/electronic-petitions/view-e-petitions/details/12/374

“unjust law is not law” https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2021/03/01/discrimination-on-the-basis-of-vaccination-status-is-inherently-wrong/

Is the vaccine safe for YOU?

1. The specific batch and vile of the vaccine given to you has not been tested (if it were used in a trial then it would not be available to you); a different batch and vile was tested, and no two instances of a manufactured product can ever be identical.

2. Moreover, the safety of the vaccine was never tested in YOU and for YOU; it was tested in other people and for THOSE people. We are not biochemically identical, and individual genetic mutations can make a difference between life and death when exposed to the same antigens.

No medication can be deemed safe for YOU until it is tested in YOU, therefore every medical product is, in essence, experimental - when given for the first time to a person.

Some legal maxims to remember:

Lex non patitur absurdum (The law does not allow an absurdity)

Lex Angliae nunquam sine parliamento mutari potest (The law of England can never be changed without an act of parliament)

https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/council/petitions/electronic-petitions/view-e-petitions/details/12/374

Vaccine Induced Antibody Dependent Enhancement

When you administer a COVID-19 vaccine, you create IgE (anti-parasitic) mediated allergy to the COVID-19 virus, and IgG (protective) antibodies to the same virus. Initially IgG has the upper hand, but it is relatively short lived, whereas IgE lasts for decades. Sneezing when re-infected with Covid is a symptom of vaccine-induced IgE antibody dependent enhancement (ADE), and this is already being reported, a new symptom. As the vaccine induced IgG immunity wanes, the IgE ADE will get worse. It is there, every vaccine will cause a degree of ADE, this is just how the immune system reacts to insect bites (vaccines are like insect bites, with the adjuvant ensuring that the immune system will react) but for now IgG dominates.

Here are some studies showing this effect in influenza vaccinated individuals:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21448311/

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-3083.2005.01710.x

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26188254/

And this one demonstrates the effect of booster-vaccines for IgE production:

https://www.jimmunol.org/content/188/1_Supplement/113.9

A note on the history of knowledge

Over the last several days I was revisiting some of my old textbooks in mathematics and engineering, just to refresh my memory about some evaluation principles, and I became aware of something that has eluded me when I was first learning those principles. Every modern product conceals a relatively recent, structural transformation of human understanding, a staggering feat of mutually dependent insights, discoveries, mathematical theorems, leading to more analytically complex evaluations and higher order theorems. For example, every machine-made product would involve the application of Calculus, which in itself is a phenomally expansive domain of theorems and proofs, but Calculus itself would not be possible without the principles of inequalities and the generalised Binomial theorem. All structural engineering (for example, your humble jetliner) involves not just calculus but an equally expansive domain of structural theorems (buckling, crippling, fatigue, flutter, elasticity, plasticity, theory of wing sections), complex algebra, aerodynamics theorems, systems theorems, gas dynamics, electronics, metallurgy. Each of the theorems in these fields was discovered and formulated by someone, in some cases involving a lifetime effort to discover just one fact, one useful theorem, on which another human could build and discover something else. For every originator that we know of, there would be countless others who dedicated their whole life to study but failed to discover anything of substance, and history will not remember them.

The origin of this metaphysical transformation can be traced to Ancient Greece, to Euclid, Pythagoras, and above all, to Aristotle, who has formalised the ultimate rule, the One Law of this world on which every other law, indeed reality itself, depends. Aristotle articulated this One Law in three intuitive forms: non-contradiction (https://culturalanalysisnet.wordpress.com/2018/03/16/how-be-rational-about-being-right/), identity (https://culturalanalysisnet.wordpress.com/2019/02/26/the-law-of-identity/), excluded middle (https://culturalanalysisnet.wordpress.com/2019/08/23/the-law-of-excluded-middle/). Nevertheless, it took nearly 2 millenia for these original insights to bear fruit. Some 400-500 years ago, the European continent was uniquely possessed by insatiable curiosity, a metaphysical drive towards understanding that could rely on the early Greek theorems and proofs for further exploration of being. Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were the next wave of pioneers, followed by Newton and Leibniz, and then by innumerable others, in an explosion of creativity that we are now consuming with animal ignorance, and sometimes with resentment, of the centuries of work and ingenuity inside it. Until you study what you use and consume, you do not even know yourself.

The WHO is a TRULY CRIMINAL organisation. They have removed from their website the following link to their own bulletin: https://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/89/7/11-089086/en/

It is now found at: https://web.archive.org/web/20201118164707/https://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/89/7/11-089086/en/

Why did they remove this 2011 bulletin? Because it talks EXPLICITLY about "pandemics of fear".

"The repeated pandemic health scares caused by an avian H5N1 and a new A(H1N1) human influenza virus are part of the culture of fear. Worst-case thinking replaced balanced risk assessment. Worst-case thinking is motivated by the belief that the danger we face is so overwhelmingly catastrophic that we must act immediately. Rather than wait for information, we need a pre-emptive strike. But if resources buy lives, wasting resources wastes lives".

"In both pandemics of fear, the exaggerated claims of a severe public health threat stemmed primarily from disease advocacy by influenza experts. In the highly competitive market of health governance, the struggle for attention, budgets and grants is fierce. The pharmaceutical industry and the media only reacted to this welcome boon."

Individuals vaccinated against Pertussis are at higher risk of multiple sclerosis.

“Subclinical Bordetella pertussis colonization of the nasopharynx persists in highly vaccinated populations, and B. pertussis toxin is a potent adjuvant that, when co-administered with neural antigens, induces neuropathology in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis, the principle animal model of multiple sclerosis. Building on these observations with supporting epidemiologic and biologic evidence, we propose that, contrary to conventional wisdom that subclinical pertussis infections are innocuous to hosts, B. pertussis colonization is an important cause of multiple sclerosis.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26724970/

Humans defend one another from abusers. Sheep run away, hoping that other sheep will be eaten instead.

This is how history will remember YOU. Endure!

This is factually true: https://www.ahpra.gov.au/News/2021-03-09-vaccination-statement.aspx

No vaccine should be approved without a proof that it does not cause IgE sensitisation to any of its contents, including any impurities. Any subsequent, sporadic, accidental etc induction of IgE to vaccine contents should incur instant statutory liability on the manufacturer, with substantial penalties and compensation payable to those affected. When this is done, we can talk again about the merits of vaccination, but until then all vaccines should be considered poison.

Anthropogenic Climate Change Hypothesis Refuted

Since Humlum 2013 we know beyond any doubt that human emissions of CO2 are not the primary driver of global temperature. Humlum has shown, by analysing the official climate data-sets, that the rate of change of global temperature shows zero sensitivity to the rate of change of CO2 concentration, which precludes the possibility of CO2 driving the global temperature.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257343053_The_phase_relation_between_atmospheric_carbon_dioxide_and_global_temperature

Humlum’s study has attracted criticism for his largely speculative, alternative explanation of climate change, but nobody has even attempted to refute his primary conclusion, that the rate of global warming does not increase in response to an increased rate of CO2 emissions, which is a necessary feature of anthropogenic climate change models.