Vaccination is an important topic. Is it in our interest? What do you think about call centre workers having access to your medical records? What do you think of the government refusing to deny that they are being indiscreet with your private medical records?
"It is being developed by pharmaceutical companies and will be given to about 13million people during the first wave of immunisation, expected to start in October. Top priority will be given to everyone aged six months to 65 with an underlying health problem, pregnant women and health professionals."
Is this another example of governments placing the interests of multi-national companies ahead of the people they are sworn to serve?
"Shadow health spokesman Mike Penning said last night: 'The last thing we want is secret letters handed around experts within the NHS. We need a vaccine but we also need to know about potential risks. 'Our job is to make sure that the public knows what's going on. Why is the Government not being open about this? It's also very worrying if GPs, who will be administering the vaccine, aren't being warned.'"
Is this politician for real, or is he simply looking to score some political points? Would he, in government be taking the same action that he is decrying?
"But vaccine experts warned that the letters proved the programme was a 'guinea-pig trial'. Dr Tom Jefferson, co-ordinator of the vaccines section of the influential Cochrane Collaboration, an independent group that reviews research, said: 'New vaccines never behave in the way you expect them to. It may be that there is a link to GBS, which is certainly not something I would wish on anybody. 'But it could end up being anything because one of the additives in one of the vaccines is a substance called squalene, and none of the studies we've extracted have any research on it at all.' He said squalene, a naturally occurring enzyme, could potentially cause so-far-undiscovered side effects."
Would like to be involved in a guinea-pig trial without your knowledge? How often does this occur?
"The UK's medicines watchdog, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, is already monitoring reported side effects from Tamiflu and Relenza and it is set to extend that surveillance to the vaccine."
In Australia, there are reports of the mentally ill being administered Tamiflu. What risks are associated with Tamiflu? Why does the U.K's medical watchdog need to monitor the side effects of this drug? Why is this drug being administered to people in Australia who have an impaired ability to make reasoned choices for themselves? And, what about the rest of our population? Who else is being prescribed Tamiflu and what are the side-effects?
"A Department of Health spokesperson said: 'The European Medicines Agency has strict processes in place for licensing pandemic vaccines."
Why is an agency for the European Union/United Nations offering a licence for vaccines? What does an applicant pay for their licence? Does the business side of the European Medicines Agency (E.M.A) soil its ability to be independent? Does the E.M.A accept payment from Pharmaceutical companies? And why does England not do any of her own testing?
"'It is extremely irresponsible to suggest that the UK would use a vaccine without careful consideration of safety issues. The UK has one of the most successful immunisation programmes in the world.'"
What precisely constitutes a "successful immunisation programme"? The Daily Mail in a previous article stated; "The European Medicines Agency is expected to license vaccines being developed by the GSK and Baxter companies in late September or early October, days before the vaccination programme is due to commence in the UK" Therefore, the Department of Health spokesman is lying.
"Confidential NHS staff records and disciplinary complaints could be accessed by hundreds of workers manning the Government's special swine flu hotline. They were able to browse through a database of emails containing doctors' and nurses' National Insurance numbers, home addresses, dates of birth, mobile phone numbers and scanned passport pages – all details that could be used fraudulently."
"A spokeswoman for NHS Professionals would not confirm whether access to the confidential files had been granted."
If this is wrong, then why not say so? Just like the American government's refusal to release the visual footage of the so-called plane hitting the Pentagon during the 9/11 inside job-this raises the appearance of guilt.
No comments:
Post a Comment
the mikiverse loves free speech and wholeheartedley accepts, that someone who is diametrically opposed to my views is free to promulgate those thoughts...However, misogyny, racism, intolerance etc will see that comment deleted.
These abstract considerations will be solely, and exclusively determined by the mikiverse, so play hard, but, nice.