I bumped into an old acquaintance in the local shopping centre recently. He knows that I’ve been sceptical about lockdowns and is aware that I’ve declined the offer of any Covid vaccination.
The Daily Sceptic –
“Mark, I’ve just found out that the pharmaceutical companies producing the Covid vaccines have immunity from prosecution,” he said.
He’s a fairly bright, elderly chap who has criticised the way the Welsh Government has handled the Covid situation and every now again he likes to get things off his chest by letting me know how he feels. I was saddened to learn of his ignorance but not surprised.
He is not alone and, after responding that I had known about the indemnity for some time, he continued angrily, “Anyway, I’ve had my third booster and I’m not having any more!”
I’ve been distracted recently from the issues of the last two and a half years by the World Athletics Championships but found it difficult to switch off from my friend’s comments.
I believe a critical contract was entered into between the public and three main bodies: the Government, healthcare professionals and the MSM. This contract is live and running. The contract is critical because it involves our public health.
In a previous article I explained the importance of informed consent and why I have no doubt that the principles of good clinical practice were abandoned in the name of Covid. Here I want to explore whether the public has been deceived into consenting to Covid policy through a serious breech of contract.
The BBC’s coverage of the World Athletics Championships was excellent. Credit where it is due. The experts commentating and reporting on events really are experts. Most of them have had first hand experience of training and competing at the highest level and have even won World, Olympic and Commonwealth medals and world records. They all seem pretty down-to-earth and I trust them to report accurately. It seems in complete contrast to the so-called ‘experts’ who managed the pandemic. They had never experienced living in any sort of lockdown, had never previously been brow-beaten into accepting a novel emergency vaccine and had never been made to wear masks in social settings. The BBC’s commentators didn’t need to provide models of expected outcomes because the viewers were going to see how things would pan out come rain or shine. The reality and purity of the sports events in a rigorously drug-tested competition was a case of what you see is what you get. Yet, in the case of the Covid experts, what you saw were delusions of grandeur. How can experts have no experience of what they are supposed to be experts about, especially when, unlike the sports commentators, they have the power to radically change people’s lives? Shouldn’t that responsibility and lack of practical knowledge make them (principally SAGE and the JCVI) extremely humble and cautious and willing to explore all options and seek second opinions? Did they warn the Government that their proposed solutions to deal with Covid were experimental in nature, weren’t based on a proper cost/benefit analysis and could potentially be disastrous? Did the Government, the healthcare professionals and the MSM break a critical contract with the public in implementing the resulting policy?
For any contract to be valid certain elements are necessary. For example, there must be an offer or exchange of promises; the mental capacity to understand the terms; and acceptance of the offer and an agreement to abide by the terms and conditions. Some examples of contract relating to these three bodies are as follows:
1. The Government’s pledge as stated here: “We pledge to ensure that:
•every person has a fair opportunity in life no matter who or where they are
•people who are furthest behind, who have the least opportunity and who are the most excluded will be prioritised
•every person counts and will be counted.”
2. The healthcare professionals’ pledge as stated here: “In relation to consent the GMC guidance reminds doctors that any decisions regarding treatment should be made in partnership with the patient and that such a partnership should be based on openness, trust and good communication.”
3. The BBC Royal Charter: “To act in the public interest, serving all audiences through the promise of impartial, high quality and distinctive output and services which inform, educate and entertain.”
Taking each in turn, let me give a few examples of contract breaches:
Read More
