Professor Robert Dingwall said children may be “better protected by natural immunity generated through infection than by asking them to take the ‘possible’ risk of a vaccine”.
…On Wednesday, Prof Dingwall, a social scientist who sits on a subcommittee of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) as well as on the JCVI, spoke out, saying the “risk/benefit for teenagers must be firmly established” before any decisions were taken.
In a detailed Twitter thread, he said: “Teenagers are at intrinsically low risk from Covid. Vaccines must be exceptionally safe to beat this. Given the low risk of Covid for most teenagers, it is not immoral to think that they may be better protected by natural immunity generated through infection than by asking them to take the possible risk of a vaccine.”
This evidence suggests that serious versions of Covid will continue to be extremely rare in children.
As you can see here, some common activities — and several other diseases — have caused significantly more childhood deaths than Covid has:
Covid testing in schools is hugely disruptive and should be suspended, experts have said, as it emerged that up to 60 per cent of “positive” tests a week are coming back negative when checked.
Under plans to keep schools open, more than 50 million lateral flow tests have been carried out on youngsters, leading to thousands of pupils and their social bubbles being forced to self-isolate for 10 days.
Manufacturers have been granted exemption from liability for any resulting harm. Ruud Dobber, a member of AstraZeneca’s senior executive team, said: “This is a unique situation where we as a company simply cannot take the risk if in … four years the vaccine is showing side effects.” (The government has taken on the liability and has an insurance scheme in place.)
Dr Hodkinson is the CEO of Western Medical Assessments, and has been the Company’s Medical Director for over 20 years. He received his general medical degrees from Cambridge University in the UK, and then became a Royal College certified pathologist in Canada (FRCPC) following a residency in Vancouver, BC.Source: Western Medical Assessments
- Dr Hodkinson’s interview is at 2h49m.
Find out more about the Investigative Corona Committee Germany.
A shortened version of the video Session 56 has been uploaded to Bitchute by Coronavirus Plushie.
Dr. Michael Dykta, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, Professor Arne Burkhardt, Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Roger Hodkinson speak with Dr. Reiner Fuellmich on Germany’s Investigative Corona Committee Session 56.
- Dr McCullough’s is at around 1h35m.
- Dr Hodkinson’s interview is at 2h49m.
Find out more about the Investigative Corona Committee Germany.
The full video has been removed from YouTube. You can find a backup mirror below:
More than 280 teens & young men suffer heart inflammation after Pfizer or Moderna Covid jab – sparking CDC ’emergency’
The CDC and other health regulators have been investigating heart inflammation cases after Israel’s Health Ministry reported that it had found a likely link to the condition in young men who received the Pfizer vaccine.
More than half of the cases reported to the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) after people had received their second dose of either the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines were in people between the ages of 12 and 24, the CDC said.
Lockdowns will be seen as the “single biggest public health mistake” in history, a Stanford professor has warned.
…”Almost from the very beginning, lockdown was going to have enormous collateral consequences, things that are sometimes are hard to see but are nevertheless real.”
Pfizer-BioNTech announced on Tuesday they have begun late-stage clinical trials of their coronavirus vaccine in children ages five to 11
Lower doses will be used for kids, 10 micrograms, compared to the 30 micrograms that those ages 12 and above receive
The company says it is hoping for data in the latter half of 2021, and is still in the early stages for trials in children between six months to four years old
On Monday, Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel said he believes his company’s vaccine will be available for kids as young as five years old by early fall
Parents and doctors have been debating about whether or not to inoculate children because they make up just 0.1% of all COVID deaths
I had no choice but to speak out against lockdowns. As a public-health scientist with decades of experience working on infectious-disease outbreaks, I couldn’t stay silent. Not when basic principles of public health are thrown out of the window. Not when the working class is thrown under the bus. Not when lockdown opponents were thrown to the wolves. There was never a scientific consensus for lockdowns. That balloon had to be popped.
…Ultimately, lockdowns protected young low-risk professionals working from home – journalists, lawyers, scientists, and bankers – on the backs of children, the working class and the poor.
Lockdowns are ‘awful’ and Britain must learn to live with Covid without restrictions, one of the country’s most senior scientists has warned.
Sir Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust and a member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), said the measures had had ‘very profound consequences’ on the nation’s mental health, education and jobs.
Launching a programme of Covid-19 immunisations for children should be considered only in special circumstances, leading health experts have warned.
They say UK medical authorities, who are currently studying how vaccines for adolescents might be administered, should move with great care over the implementation of such a programme.
Alex talks with Dr. Byram Bridle, an Associate Professor on Viral Immunology at the University of Guelph about new peer-reviewed studies that suggests there may be terrifying reasons side effects such as heart inflammation, VITT (Vaccine induced Thrombosis and Thrombocytopenia) , and other serious issues may occur in those who have been vaccinated.
- New scientific information that has helped us understand why the vaccine problems are happening.
- This is backed up by well-known peer-reviewed scientific publications.
- SARS-CoV-2 has a spike protein on its surface which is what it allows us to infect our bodies.
- Vaccines get the cells in our body to manufacture the spike protein.
- In theory, if we can mount an immune response to this protein, we can prevent the virus from infecting the body.
- When studying the disease, cardio-vascular problems, bleeding and clotting have been associated with severe COVID-19.
- The spike protein is almost entirely responsible for the damage to the cardio-vascular system.
- If you inject the purified spike protein into blood of lab animals, they get all sorts of damage to the cardio-vascular system.
- The assumption up until know is that the new COVID-19 vaccinations behave like other vaccines: they stay at the injection site.
- However, a FOI request has revealed a bio-distribution study that shows the spike protein of the new COVID-19 vaccines gets into the blood post-vaccination and accumulate in tissues such as the spleen, bone marrow, liver, adrenal glands and ovaries.
- It’s been known for a long time that the spike protein is a pathogenic protein–it’s a toxin.
- We now have evidence that the new vaccines gets into blood circulation. When in circulation, the spike protein can bind to the receptors on our platelets and the cells that line our blood vessels.
- When this happens, it can either cause clotting or bleeding.
- It can cross the blood-brain barrier and cause neurological damage.
- There is also evidence that the antibodies can be transferred through breast milk (study not yet accepted). The could be evidence that suckling infants experiencing bleeding disorders in the gastrointestinal tract.
- This has implications for blood donations, sucking infants and people who are not at risk from COVID-19–that includes all our children.
- We made a big mistake. We thought the spike protein was a great target antigen. We didn’t know the spike protein itself was a pathogenic protein.
- By vaccinating people we are inadvertently inoculating them with a toxin that can cause damage.
- Will we be rendering young people infertile?
Resources use inappropriate emotional pressure
The Human Medicines Regulations 2012 (the ‘Regulations’) apply to anything ‘designed to promote the … supply … or use of that [medicinal] product’, which according to the regulations amounts to an advertisement. As the materials do not properly encourage critical thinking and present information as fact without substantiation, it is entirely possible that the teaching materials and lessons delivering those materials amount to an advertisement and may constitute an offence.
However well meaning these materials might be, it appears that they have at least the potential to put emotional pressure on children and — potentially — coercively control children’s decisions in relation to the vaccine. The materials are therefore incompatible with the NC and the government’s advice on Teachers’ Prevent Duty, which are there to help protect children.
CDC looking into reports that a small number of teens and young adults vaccinated against the coronavirus that may have experienced heart problems
Condition, known as myocarditis, results in an inflammation of the heart muscle which can occur following certain infections
Problems have been occurring four days after the second dose has been given
Dozens of cases have been reported to the agency in recent week
It is not yet clear which vaccine might be responsible, Moderna or Pfizer
The agency’s vaccine safety group was sparse in details, saying only that there were ‘relatively few’ cases and levels were similar to normal
Group also said that the conditions may be entirely unrelated to vaccination
The Government is facing a backlash over plans to extend the vaccine rollout to children, with some experts questioning the benefits of the proposed move.
Dozens of medics, doctors and scientists have written to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to express their “grave concern” over the proposals.
In a joint letter, they warned it is “irresponsible, unethical and unnecessary” to jab children and urged the medicines watchdog not to “repeat mistakes from history”.
Hard to justify right now for most children in most countries
Following widespread vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 of older adults and other highly vulnerable groups, some high income countries are now considering vaccinating children; just days ago, the US Food and Drug Administration authorized the use of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in children 12-15 years of age. Young people have been largely spared from severe covid-19 so far, and the value of childhood vaccination against respiratory viruses in general remains an open question for three reasons: the limited benefits of protection in age groups that experience only mild disease; the limited effects on transmission because of the range of antigenic types and waning vaccine induced immunity; and the possibility of unintended consequences related to differences in vaccine induced and infection induced immunity. We discuss each in turn.
Still, however, the battle for common sense over hysteria is far from won. Do we really think testing healthy children at an estimated cost of £144,564 per positive test is either “sensible” or “proportionate”? Do we really think that asking children who’ve already missed so much this year to miss further days isolating for a virus against which all vulnerable adults have been vaccinated is a drawback appropriately balanced against a benefit? And what do we think of this in the context of the looming discussion over offering the vaccine to children – at negligible risk from Covid – given the harm we should assume will ensue to a small minority of them?
I won’t have been the only parent concerned by news last week that the Pfizer vaccine may be approved for use on children as early as June and potentially rolled out to school pupils from September. Healthy children are at almost no serious risk from Covid-19 – the recovery rate for this age group has been calculated at over 99.99 per cent. The argument that children should have the vaccine is not based on a belief that they need or benefit from it but on the logic that it would be good for our communities at large if children were jabbed. In short, those advocating it assume that children have an obligation to protect adults.
It’s worth noting that the UK Government has granted immunity from liability for harms to all Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers. Can we really ask children to accept a greater risk than the manufacturers themselves are prepared to live with?
Schools back mass vaccinations for children, with headteachers saying that “peer pressure” will boost take up.
Education leaders would be willing to help facilitate a vaccine roll-out at schools around the country, according to Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), the largest union for secondary school heads.
…“I think there will be a sense of schools wanting to step up and play their part and explain to children why having the vaccine is important during assemblies and in tutor time.”
…He explained that vaccinating children at school could result in higher take-up because pupils would not want to feel socially isolated by refusing to have the jab.
…“The peer pressure of seeing that your friends are lining up to do it is likely to make the overall numbers taking up the vaccine higher,” he said. Some scientists have argued that if Covid rates rose significantly it would be a priority to vaccinate children to prevent any more disruption or closures of schools during the next academic year.