In this guest post, Sarah Baxter writes of her concerns for Aboriginal community health as the QLD government begins to roll out COVID-19 vaccination.
The biological agents recommended globally for the COVID-19 vaccination programs are the most rushed “vaccines” ever developed, yet the manufacturers have been given total immunity from liability for any resultant injuries. Furthermore, these experimental procedures have not been proven to prevent infection nor transmission of coronaviruses. Clinical safety trials are not yet finished; thus, the recipients are essentially participants in an ongoing medical experiment. Regardless of this information, the QLD government is beginning to roll out COVID-19 vaccination in 2 phases, the second of which is targeted towards Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities using the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine.
The Australian and New Zealand Society for Immunology recommends the federal government immediately pause the planned rollout of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine.
Immunology Society president Professor Stephen Turner has said based on current trial evidence the vaccine should not be widely rolled out. (1) There have also been concerns raised in other countries; for example, health officials in France, Germany, Italy, Sweden and Poland have advised against its use in older people, and Switzerland’s medical regulator will not authorise use of the Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.
Switzerland was the first European country to rule against approving the jab: “For the vaccine from AstraZeneca, the data available and evaluated to date are not yet sufficient for approval,” stated SwissMedic. (2,3)
In order to obtain additional data on safety, efficacy and quality, data from new studies are required.
In parts of Sweden, vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine has been stopped due to the accumulation of side effects among hospital staff. In one region, 100 out of 400 people experienced side effects. “We are stopping the administration until further notice in order to investigate the whole thing and to prevent staff shortages,” commented Magnus Johansson, drug manager for the
Swedish region of Sörmland. (4)
France has also reported an adverse event rate of 20% – 25% (5) and will be “slowing down” its AstraZeneca vaccination program due to the side effects.
Germany has publicly questioned the use of the experimental AstraZeneca vaccine in the elderly (6) and has set the age limit at 65 years. (7) There have also been serious questions raised here regarding effectiveness. (8) Poland only recommends the injection for those younger than 60 years of age and Italy only recommends it for those 55 and younger. (9) South Africa also suspended its roll out of the AstraZeneca vaccine. (10,11,12)
Lacking testing on certain groups
Overall, there has been a lack of testing on those who are vulnerable, elderly, or disabled, children, pregnant women, and people of colour. It is therefore of utmost importance to have reliable and genuine adverse event reporting systems in place prior to the rollout. Race and ethnicity can influence antibody response. Physician and attorney Dr Simone Gold, (13) the founder of America’s Frontline Doctors, states that people of colour (including Indigenous people) have a natural antipathy towards vaccines, and she gives many examples where vaccines have gone wrong for black and brown people.
With rubella, measles, pertussis, hepatitis, and haemophilus influenza vaccines, people of colour have shown to have higher antibody responses. With regards to the hepatitis B vaccine specifically, white boys were 64 times less likely to have autism diagnoses than non-white post vaccination. Dr Gold asks, why are people of colour now being prioritised to receive these experimental COVID vaccines? She confirms that there is no pandemic in most parts of Africa. There is also no data to suggest that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders are at any particular risk of COVID-19.
Dr. Natalie Dean, a biostatistician and expert in vaccine trial design at the University of Florida, gave Oxford and AstraZeneca “a poor grade for transparency and rigor when it comes to the vaccine trial results that they have reported.” (14) Importantly, the AstraZeneca vaccine has not been safety tested against an inert saline placebo, as per the gold standard of drug testing. This raises a concern as to the validity of adverse events comparisons. In the trials of the AstraZeneca vaccine, a MenACWY meningococcal vaccine ‘Nimenrix’ was used as the control and comparator in the absence of a saline placebo in two out of the three trials (15) and “Serious adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 79 of whom received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 89 of whom received MenACWY or saline control”. (16) One of the vaccinated trial participants developed an inflammation of the spinal cord, known as transverse myelitis. (17) Not long after, a second case of transverse myelitis occurred in the trial. (18) While other immediate adverse events have also been recorded – including death and acute neuroencephalopathy. (19)
The full list of side effects of the experimental vaccine are yet to be fully revealed.
Not only are there obvious safety and efficacy concerns, but there are serious ethical concerns because of the animal and human DNA components of the AstraZeneca vaccine and how these ingredients were derived. “The wild type chimpanzee adenovirus isolate Y25 was originally obtained from William Hillis, John Hopkins University of Medicine and the virus was passaged in HEK293A cells”. (20) This means that a virus that normally infects chimpanzees has been genetically modified and combined with a cell line developed from the aborted foetus of a 14-week Caucasian female. A weakened and non-replicating version of the common cold virus (adenovirus)is taken from chimpanzees then engineered to contain instructions for creating the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2’ – the virus that reportedly causes COVID-19. Why did they use a chimpanzee virus instead of the coronavirus strain responsible for COVID-19? Has SARS-CoV2 been isolated from humans, and if not, why not?
The following is copied from the UK handout for the AstraZeneca vaccine:
Recombinant, replication-deficient chimpanzee adenovirus vector encoding the SARS-CoV2 spike glycoprotein. Produced in genetically modified human embryonic kidney cells. This product contains GMOs and 5 x 1010 viral particles. The other excipients are L-histidine, L-histidine hydrochloride, monohydrate, mg chloride hexahydrate, polysorbate 80, ethanol, sucrose, sodium chloride, disodium edetate dihydrate, and water for injection. On the box, AstraZeneca reveals their new vaccine is ‘ChAdOx1-S’ Recombinant DNA also known as AZD1222. That is the single most prominent ingredient. AZD1222 involves using direct RNA sequencing to analyse transcript expression from the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 genome in human MRC-5 (21) and A549 (22) cell lines that are non-permissive for vector replication alongside the replication permissive cell line, HEK293.
HEK stands for human embryonic kidney and 293 pertains to the number of foetuses aborted to create this cell line.
Hundreds of human lives were taken for this procedure, and the foetuses were dissected, and organs removed while alive, for the extraction of the living cells. Chimpanzees have also been subject to inhumane treatment in the name of science and tortured in the thousands to create vaccines and other medical products. It is therefore understandable that these experimental vaccines pose a major moral and ethical dilemma…
A spokeswoman for the Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne Peter Comensoli said that the church encourages people to use a vaccine that has not been developed using human foetal cells deriving from abortion. They refer to the vaccine as ethically compromised. (23) Other religious leaders have also expressed concern about the ethical implications of the experimental vaccine. All recipients must be made aware as to how the AstraZeneca vaccine was created for valid informed consent to take place. If the administrators of the vaccines do not divulge this important information, they and their superiors will be personally liable under the penalty of perjury in a court of law.
Cell line HEK-293 transfected with Adenovirus 5 (AD5) has also been used in the manufacture of other failed vaccines. (24) AD5 was used in the unsuccessful HIV vaccine trials. “…we are concerned that use of an Ad5 vector for immunisation against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) could similarly increase the risk of HIV-1 acquisition among men who receive the vaccine” (25) and “potential major problem – that such vaccines might increase susceptibility to HIV infection. This also raised the question of whether the problem extends to some or all of the other recombinant adenovirus vectors currently in development or to other vector-based vaccines”. (26)
It is interesting that the abandoned CSL vaccine generated HIV antibodies in some participants. (27) There are certainly legitimate concerns around pathogenic priming and antibody-dependent enhancement, pertaining to serious consequences from exposure to a ‘wild strain’, or any other respiratory viruses for that matter, post-vaccination. Due to a reconstructed chimpanzee virus being used in the AstraZeneca experimental vaccine, there is also the possibility for contamination. Even after many thousands or millions of vaccinations, some vaccines have been found to be contaminated with live viruses. Despite attempts to produce “germ free” vaccines, contamination with live viruses can still occur. (28)
The FDA states, “Some of these tumor-forming cell lines may contain cancer-causing viruses that are not actively reproducing. Such viruses are hard to detect using standard methods. These latent, or ‘quiet’, viruses pose a potential threat, since they might become active under vaccine manufacturing conditions.” (29) The peer reviewed journal Nature confirmed: “Although testing is a key component of viral safety in biotechnology products, the data presented here indicate that testing alone is not enough to ensure that a given product is free of a viral contaminant, and that a holistic, multifaceted approach must be taken. This is never more true than when faced with a previously unknown emerging virus, such as SARS-CoV-2, where the capacity of the virus to infect production cell lines or be detected in existing assays is not initially known.” (30)
Some of the ethical, moral and health concerns in response to the reported “Phase 1B COVID-19 vaccine roll-out” in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities have been outlined here and need to be independently examined by health professionals and governing bodies. The AstraZeneca vaccine that is being employed as part of this campaign is rushed and experimental, has not undergone adequate testing, and is already producing many adverse events. Other countries have raised serious concerns about the vaccine, and immunologists in our own country have not recommended its use. There is no long-term data on severe adverse effects, nor for the outcomes on fertility or pregnancy. The impact of the vaccine on different ethnic groups is unknown, and the vaccine has been largely untested on “vulnerable” subsets of the population.
The ingredients of the AstraZeneca vaccine are concerning from an ethical perspective, and because of the possibility for live viral contamination. Furthermore, we have seen the potential for increased susceptibility to other diseases as per similar vaccines, and pathogenic priming post COVID-19 vaccination is of great concern. All this for a disease with a 99%+ survival rate, that has utilised a test that gives false positives, resulting in a false flag pandemic, for a virus that has not shown to affect Indigenous peoples around the world nor the Original custodians of this land.
About the author:
Sarah Baxter is a political candidate for the Informed Medical Options Party
She holds Bachelor of Social Science (with majors in Anthropology and Environmental science), Diploma of Homeopathy (International Academy of Classical Homeopathy) and is a member of the Australian Homoeopathic Association.