A female officer with Victoria Police, who served for 16 years, has resigned in protest against the use of police to enforce Covid-19 rules, saying in an interview that a “great majority” of her colleagues shared her sentiments.
…Some rough behavior by the police during the pandemic might be partially explained by the enforcement approach taken by Victoria Premier Daniel Andrews, Mitchell suggested. “I think that the reason, or the issue, in why perhaps police [are] feeling more emboldened to act the way they are in relation to these harsher actions is because of the messaging that comes from Dan [Andrews],” who tells the law enforcers what to do “on a daily basis,” she said.
The authorities are literally going against the science and lying to victims of Covid in order to avoid creating a benefit that others might seek out at a potential risk. Except that they themselves are responsible for creating the restrictive system from which people are now literally seeking out infection to find relief – if only to acquire a health pass good for six months so they’re able to access everyday venues and basic freedoms.
Acting Senior Sergeant Krystle Mitchell is a sworn member of the Victoria Police in Australia. She has served Victorians for 16 years as a police officer including 6 years at Professional Standards Command – the division responsible for investigating police misconduct, corruption, discrimination and freedom of information, referring investigations to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) where appropriate.
Acting Senior Sergeant Mitchell cites ethical conflicts as the reason for speaking publicly about conduct of Victoria Police officers, their Chief Commissioner – Shane Patton, their Minister – the Hon. Lisa Neville MP, and ultimately their Premier – the Hon. Daniel Andrews MP. She feels she can no longer remain silent with the division between police and community is growing, and totally ignored by the leadership of both the police and government.
Despite a promise to focus on ‘Community Policing’ and ‘Back to Basics’ policing by Shane Patton, Acting Senior Sergeant Mitchell has witnessed the opposite trajectory during the Covid-19 pandemic and is reminding her colleagues that ultimately they will individually be held accountable for their actions, and are still subject to s 462A of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) which forbids the disproportionate use of force.
She is also calling for Victoria Police to remain consistent to the values, ethics and decision making frameworks (such as SELF) that it used to demand of its members a mere 2 years ago.
At least three claims over serious side effects of Oxford-made vaccine AstraZeneca have been upheld in Norway, resulting in financial compensation. Dozens more are expecting a ruling in connection with coronavirus-jab reactions.
The Norwegian System of Patient Injury Compensation (NPE) will make payments to three applicants badly affected by the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, it announced on Friday. It officially confirmed that the vaccine, currently suspended in the European country, has resulted in severe cases of blood clots and low platelet counts in these patients, one of whom died.
The Health Secretary claims he “tried” to throw a protective ring around care homes but, from my experience in the early days of the pandemic, he couldn’t have come up with a more disastrous and deadly policy.
As a GP working mainly with elderly patients in care homes and intermediate care I witnessed, at first hand, the absolute disaster that was the government policy at the start of the Covid-19 outbreak. Elderly patients who were Covid-19 positive, or not tested, or perhaps even negative, were simply shovelled out of hospitals and into care homes. ‘The hospitals must be cleared out… nothing else matters.’
The main purpose of science is to question and attack. To subject ideas to the greatest scrutiny. Those who decide to shut down and stifle debate – whatever they may believe themselves to be doing – are, in fact, traitors to the cause of science. Stranglers of the enlightenment, assassins of progress.
They are not alone, and things have gotten far worse in the past year or so. Science has taken a terrible battering during Covid-19, though I have always known that dissent against a widely held scientific hypothesis is difficult.
Danish authorities have opted for a more cautious path, even though Reuters reported that excluding J&J’s shot could significantly delay the country’s vaccination efforts.
Danish drug officials last month abandoned the use of AstraZeneca’s Covid-19 vaccine, also citing the risk of blood clots. In March, Denmark became the first country in the world to temporarily suspend the AstraZeneca shot, but unlike its European neighbors, the country made that suspension permanent.
While 71 percent of white staff had received at least their first dose, a mere 37 percent of black workers had come forward for the jab. Rates among South Asians were also low, around 60 percent.
So, why are the excess death data and the Covid deaths data so out of whack? And why isn’t Covid killing lots and lots of people this winter, as it did in spring? Even if you ascribe all excess deaths to Covid and none to lockdown, there really does not seem to be anything out of the normal variation in total deaths from year to year. And surely, by now, the toll of unnecessary deaths caused by untreated cancer, heart disease, depression and so on, has at least begun to register.
One reason coronavirus might not be slaying all around it this winter is because, well, this is not its first winter. Remember: it is called Covid-19, as in 2019. Of course, the official version of history states that the virus never reached Western civilisation until the spring of 2020, but evidence for this assertion is based on dodgy polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests and a profound rejection of common sense. (By the way, how many people do you know who had a severe bout of pneumonia-like symptoms last winter?)
But the main reason for the disparity is obvious: mass PCR testing. Under the current regime (science is the wrong word), a ‘Covid death’ is someone who dies having tested positive for Covid within the previous 28 days. When you test all hospital patients, as the UK does, then some of them will turn out to be positive – how many depends largely on the way you do the tests. And the more tests you do, the more ‘Covid deaths’ you will generate. It is that simple. Dr Mike Yeadon has written extensively on this, which he calls the PCR false positive pseudo-epidemic.
The conclusion of their 34-page ruling included the following: “In view of current scientific evidence, this test shows itself to be unable to determine beyond reasonable doubt that such positivity corresponds, in fact, to the infection of a person by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”
But where did this one percent figure come from? You may find this hard to believe, but this figure emerged by mistake. A pretty major thing to make a mistake about, but that’s what happened.
In order to understand what happened, you have to understand the difference between two medical terms that sound the same – but are completely different. [IFR and CFR.]
CFR will always be far higher than the IFR. With influenza, the CFR is around ten times as high as the IFR. Covid seems to have a similar proportion.
Now, clearly, you do not want to get these figures mixed up. By doing so you would either wildly overestimate, or wildly underestimate, the impact of Covid. But mix these figures up, they did.
…we’ve had all the deaths we were ever going to get. And which also means that lockdown achieved, almost precisely nothing with regard to Covid. No deaths were prevented.
Covid-19 could be “petering out by itself” before the world comes up with any vaccine, a leading academic, formerly the World Health Organization’s (WHO) top oncologist has said.