Claim: only 1.9% of Australians are against the Covid vaccine.
Gaslighting and the Straw Man Fallacy from Perth's tabloid rag, the Sunday Times.
A tabloid Gaslighting the majority of the Australian population with fallacies and misinformation.
The Sunday Times, a once-a-week tabloid that disseminates its misinformation in Perth, Western Australia, published a nasty, divisive article by journalist John Flint last Sunday that sets up one straw man after another and then with a great heaving effort knocks them all down, gaslighting the great majority of people in Australia now who are refusing to submit to the continual ridiculous round of repeated and obviously useless Covid-19 injections.
Having been misinformed by a someone at church that this article ‘presented both sides of the story’ (Mary’s strange sense of humour at work), I hunted down a copy. In the IGA store I found one and paid the massively inflated price of $4 for a collection of papers sheets less useful to me than a used toilet roll (from now on to be known as “The Sunday Sheet-paper” - say it like a Mexican), and proceeded to read it.
“What becomes of the anti-vaxxer?”
The cover proclaims the first fallacy, an'“ad-hominem attack,” by calling people who oppose the mRNA and spike injections, ‘anti-vaxxers.’ This is basically a lie in itself, and sets the tone of the article in the sewer, where it belongs.
In the article later on Mr Flint uses sharp language in referring to those who opposed these injections as right-wing extremists.
I myself opposed these injections right from the start, but not because I’m against vaccination – in fact, I have often argued for vaccination; the Wikipedia article on the symptoms of tetanus is something everyone should read before they oppose all vaccinations. As a child I was fully vaccinated, I’ve always had my travel-jabs, and I had the flu shot in 2021 – but I opposed the Covid injections myself, from the start, because they were experimental and I find that I take somewhat of a dislike to my government infringing the Nuremberg Code.
The Nuremberg Trials hung Nazis.
By the way, I think it’s hard to argue, somehow, that my quoting the Nuremberg code shows that I am a right-wing extremist, as the Nuremberg trial was an occasion in which a bunch of right-wing extremists, i.e. actual Nazis, were hung for their crimes against humanity, which included experimenting on people without their consent.
Saying “Voluntary consent is essential” is not right-wing extremism or anti-vax.
The first line of the Nuremberg Code sums up my own objections to the experimental mRNA and spike injections quite succinctly:
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
If anyone wants to argue that people’s consent to these injections was ‘voluntary’, then they were not living in the same country as I was. People who wanted to go to work lost three to six months’ income for refusing to submit to medical coercion. Many, many people got the injection because they were forced to, to continue working.
The Nuremberg code goes on to explain that this is wrong:
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion.
If Mr Flint wants to argue that the mRNA injections were not experimental and were consensual, let me ask him this question: do you even know how long the series of trials is supposed to be before a new medication is approved?
The trial period is normally twelve years and must include in vitro studies, animal studies, and longitudinal human studies (longitudinal, meaning, studying a large group of people over a long period of time.). Note that no mRNA ‘vaccine’ had been made before these ones that actually worked. It is very clear these ones don’t work either, actually, but let’s pretend for a moment that they did work.
The mRNA injections were still completely experimental, simply measuring them by the same yard stick as any other unprecedented medication.
And as we know now from the Pfizer documents that Pfizer tried to keep secret for seventy five years, which were only forced out into the light of day by Federal court action in the US, a young child, Maddie Grey, suffered paralysis twenty four hours after the injection and this reaction was recorded in the trial data as a stomach ache and nausea, their initial trials had five times as many exclusions in the treatment arm as the placebo arm, the British Medical Journal published allegations of fraud in the trials that were never investigated, there were deaths in the actual trial report that were not included in the FDA submission, and the medications continued to be approved only under Emergency Use Authorisation, which means - gee! - they were experimental.
Opposition to medical coercion is apparently a hard-right ‘freedom movement’.
The sub-headline is the next piece of gaslighting.
Apparently those not taking the jab are part of a hard-right ‘freedom movement’. Considering that over 80% of Australians have declined the government’s kind invitation to be jabbed with the fourth injection, obviously the majority of Australians are part of a hard-right freedom movement too. Gee, who knew that?
In fact I know from the protests that there are many left-wing people and groups opposing this coercion as well. It’s bad for us all. I myself was a union delegate once at my place of employment, and I got a whole place of work signed up to the union once, so I am hardly right-wing. (It’s not really our fault if the left has gone so far to the left these days as to exclude the middle.)
Monica Smit, who is probably the figurehead of the movement in Australia, is hardly extreme in any way shape or form. So this appellative says much more about The Sunday Sheet-paper and the sharpness of Flint than it does about people who oppose medical coercion.
The article begins: Is there any point remaining ‘virulently anti-vax’ when only 1.9% of Australians refused the jab?
The article begins with the question: Is there any point remaining ‘virulently anti-vax’ when only 1.9% of Australians refused the jab?
It is well known among social scientists that the best way to convince people to do something is to convince them that everybody is doing it, so stating this figure instead of the 80% of people who refused the latest jab, shows Flint obviously has a good edge, as far as social science goes.
But there are good reasons for believing the Government figures are inflated concerning the number of people who have been jabbed, anyway; nevertheless, even if only 1.9% refused the jab, I actually believe most people would have refused it if they felt they were in a position to. They took the injections because they were coerced, in order to keep their job, or to visit ageing parents, or family members in hospital. What this figure actually may mean is that 98.1 % of Australians were coerced into taking the jab against their will.
Whatever the numbers might say, medical coercion is both ethically wrong and against the Australian constitution.
Furthermore, if something is morally wrong, it is wrong regardless of how many or how few oppose it. A large percentage of the German population agreed with the Nazi party, but that doesn’t make any evil they did into a good thing.
And take the lockdowns, for instance: that ancient tome the Bible, which was once the infallible guide for law and morality in the Western World, contains instructions on quarantining people with leprosy in Leviticus 13-14. Read it yourself: the Biblical injunction is very strict and only allows for quarantining people who are clearly actually ill.
For the only ethically valid reason for quarantining someone is that they are sick with an infectious disease. The quarantining of healthy people goes against every principle of every quarantine in history; except perhaps for one historical example; the quarantining of healthy Jews in the early part of the Nazi regime in Germany. This is the only example I know about, where a coercive quarantine was applied to healthy people.
The cessation of mandates? What about unvaccinated medical workers?
There is so much misinformation in this article that I think my refutation is going to end up being longer than the advertising section in the Sunday Sheet-paper.
Flint then says that the mandates have ended - well, in fact, what he seems to have overlooked is the fact that unvaccinated medical workers still can’t go back to work.
Whilst doctors and nurses continue to blithely cooperate with this injustice, they have absolutely no right at all to complain about low staffing levels and stress. Let them complain instead that they want their unvaccinated coworkers back on the job, otherwise, let them shut their mealy little cowardly mouths.
The deadliest health emergency in 100 years?
According to the Sunday Sheet-paper, this was apparently the deadliest health emergency in 100 years. Well, considering the average age of death from Covid even in the worst stages of Alpha and Delta was 84, and that this was higher than the average life-expectancy of most Western nations (from memory I think Australia’s life expectancy before this was 82 or 83), I think this can hardly be called the deadliest health emergency in 100 years.
And there are a lot of questions about the statistics about Covid deaths, particularly in relation to vaccinations, which I may go into later.
Monica Smit in Europe
Apparently Reignite Democracy’s Monica Smit is in Europe to forge alliances with other groups, because she is trying to maintain her relevance. Well, actually, she is probably there because her video blogs have a massive world-wide influence. Never mind that one.
Gaslighting us over the UN and WEF’s tentacles being everywhere
The next example of a logical fallacy is Flint’s rather artless combination of ad hominim/straw man/gaslighting fallacies.
Monica Smit and Australian politician Craig Kelly, also maligned in the article, Flint says are “regurgitating a conspiracy theory about the World Economic Forum and Klaus Schwab.”
Before we call criticising the WEF a conspiracy theory let us just reflect for a moment on the amount of funding the WEF receives. We’ll start with pocket change. Trudeau gave $2.9 million of Canadian taxpayer money to the WEF in 2020-21 alone. Partnership fees (and there are more than 1000 industry partners) are $523,000 a year for Industry (that’s half a billion dollars per annum already! ) and $628,000 for governments; and they received $460 million for pandemic preparedness in 2017 from various Western governments (isn’t it amazingly lucky how well prepared they were?) And that is just one of their many programs. The WEF received much more than $60 million from US tax-payers in the last 8-9 years.
And the WEF says in their document “From Funding To Financing” that an additional $2.5 trillion needs to be put in, if we’re going to do things properly. That would be nice pocket change for you and me: and this money is supposed to come out of our taxes. If a group I was in was trying to suck trillions of dollars out of the economy, and was pushing a bunch of ideological views, that wouldn’t be a conspiracy, would it?
In fact Monica Smit and Craig Kelly are on a crusade to curb the well-documented aims of the left-wing extremists of the WEF, who want to close down the farms and are already managing to do it e.g. in Holland, Scotland and Ireland, because they want us all eating bugs instead of meat, and who would dearly love us all to be under a continual lockdown for the sake of the environment, and who also want us to ‘own nothing and be happy’ by 2030.
I would challenge Mr. Flint to refute any of the things I’m saying here. I know he can’t, because it’s all true and well-documented, and if Mr. Flint doesn’t know about this, then he is not a real journalist but a mere mouthpiece for the vitriol of others.
Klaus Schwab, who is chair of the WEF, put out a lovely video early on in the lockdowns proclaiming how wonderful it was having empty streets with no one around, and whose friendly neighbourhood minions (that is, those who went through his Young Global Leaders program or who are members of the WEF) include Justin Trudeau and more than half the Canadian cabinet, Angela Merkel, Emmanuelle Macron, Boris Johnson, Jacinda Ardern, Jimmy Wales founder of Wikipedia, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, the former Prime Minister of Australia Scott Morrison, and Joe Hockey, and even Vladimir Putin, etc etc etc.
Oh, sorry, I was almost sucked in by a conspiracy theory <sarc>; it’s just coincidence that the same people espousing and trying to implement the same destructive far-left ideological measures and who are living in an echo chamber where they all say the same things over and over again all went through the same far-left WEF indoctrination program.
Oh no, I’ve been completely overcome by sarcasm - please excuse me a moment while I recover my cold, calm rationality.
Putin is the only one of the graduates who doesn’t spout the same garbage - I guess he must have rebelled, because he does not espouse these left wing views, but that’s another story. What can be said for him, that can’t be said for all the others, is that at least he cares for the welfare of the people in his nation.
Saying those who oppose Klaus Schwab’s views are conspiracy theorists is basically gaslighting.
Gaslighting Andrea Tokaji
Andrea Tokaji apparently said to the audience that “she knew at the outset of the pandemic that this was a man-made virus, that was going to be used to take away our freedoms and our rights, and implement a communist ideology.”
I don’t have time to go through every piece of misinformation in the Sunday Sheet-paper’s article, but whatever Andrea Tokaji knew at the outset, there actually is a great deal of evidence that the virus actually was man-made. A British Parliamentary inquiry conducted by the Science and Technology Select Committee in December 2021 found a great deal of evidence that the virus probably originated in the Wuhan lab, including the fact that the first cases of the virus occurred in the residential district of the lab employees. They also found that the evidence that the virus originated in the lab was suppressed by media and scientific journals such as Lancet.
Studies going back to 2013 show that the Wuhan lab was indisputably carrying on gain of function research, and this research was funded by the NIH through Peter Daszak’s Eco-Health Alliance. Daszak was the one whose letter, co-signed by other notable scientist, was published in Lancet early on in the pandemic and basically put the kibosh on investigations into the Coronavirus origins. "It took us over a year to persuade him (Daszak) to declare his full competing interest, which we eventually did in June of this year," admitted the editor of Lancet, Dr. Richard Horton during his rather uncomfortable testimony.
If Mr. Flint wants to exercise his journalistic sharpness on these points I challenge him to refute any of this. I know he won’t be able to because he can’t, because everything I’ve said here is factual.
Mr Bosi said that people should be hanged.
Mr Flint’s next cutting remark is about Riccardo Bosi. His point here is that Mr Bosi said that those involved in the “COVID hoax” should be hung - and Mr Bosi did say that, I admit it.
But Mr Bosi in his video actually began by pointing out that the Nazi doctors who performing coercive medical experiments on human subjects were actually hung. The whole population of Australia except 1.9% according to the Sunday Sheet-paper have actually been coerced into receiving a series of experimental medications, that have certainly harmed and killed many people. Hanging was the punishment that the Allies at the end of World War Two decided was appropriate at the time, for those doctors and military men who performed lethal experiments on unwilling subjects.
What punishment for this crime does Mr Flint think is appropriate? Telling them they did the right thing?
But Bosi also said, “Everybody needs a shot at redemption… all of us were asleep at some point.” And Bosi said, people need to stop, turn around and walk back. In other words, Bosi hismelf provided a way out for people from this fate, and perhaps Mr Flint himself should think about this before he writes his next article.
For I myself don’t particularly want to see anybody be hung – I would certain rather see people forgiven and reconciled – but I also know how fickle populations of people are – and I know that if there’s anything in the whole world that could get the mildly mannered people of Australia baying for blood, I think the fact that so many of their children have been hurt by these unnecessary injections may be the catalyst that gets them to that point.
RMIT Fact-Checkers
Flint mentions some RMIT fact-checkers in his article next, talking about the well-documented side effect of the vaccine, a recurrence of the Herpes Zoster virus causing a kind of shingles. He uses misdirection here, and quotes a professor who says an article that contained 261 subjects of whom 6 got this side effect, only contained 6 subjects.
Anyway I looked up the RMIT fact-checkers well-funded website, which obviously receives a great deal of well-deserved (cough-cough) government funding. They have honed the art of misdirection to a fine point, and in this, they join with Flint in the evident sharpness of their conclusions. What they do, in multiple articles on their website, is quote some point that nobody actually believes, a point that sounds a little like some point that is actually true, and they refute the point that nobody actually believes whilst not giving any credit to the truth; like John Flint saying that people are saying that monkey-pox is a side effect of the vaccine, when what people were actually pointing out on the internet is that the same images were being used to depict monkey-pox as those on other websites that depict shingles. And shingles itself is actually a side effect, as the 261 person study showed quite clearly (the side effect occurred in each case within two days of the jab, and I know at least 2 people in my small circle of friends who suffered this same side effect.)
This nasty little habit of the RMIT fact-checkers is called ‘making a straw man and knocking it down’ and one would think true fact-checkers would understand that the straw man is actually a logical fallacy.
But sadly nobody studies philosophy these days; nobody even studies that poorer cousin of philosophy, logic, so it’s not surprising that RMIT can get away with such travesties on their government funded website. It’s so wonderful to see our tax-dollars at work, isn’t it? It’s wonderful to know that they are not just going down the proverbial plug-hole into a morass of misinformation and lies and nasty straw man fallacies - oh sorry, I got into sarcasm mode again.
Please give me a moment to recover.
Back to window-cleaning.
Well, I’m only a quarter through refuting all the misinformation in this tabloid piece, but I have to go back to work window-cleaning now to make up some of the income I lost because of losing my job for three months, for refusing the jab.
So if you like my articles, don’t forget to support me by subscribing with a paid subscription.
PART TWO - 6 OCTOBER 2022
This is my continuation of yesterday’s fact check refuting John Flint’s misdirection, misinformation and lies in Perth’s Sunday Times.
Deaths and injuries from the vaccine - TGA says only 13 died from the vaccine.
John Flint says that in August the Vaccination Risks Network claimed that more people had died from the vaccination than from the virus. He then reports that the TGA said that only 13 deaths were directly linked to vaccination. The ABS reports that by January 2022, 2,566 people had died directly from Covid since the beginning of the pandemic; Worldometer says there have been 15,266 deaths altogether in Australia, although their statistics in January were inflated by at least 40% so the real figure might be nearer 10,000. So 13 deaths from the vaccination are not many, apparently.
Nonetheless in Italy in November 2014, 13 people died within 48 hours of receiving the Novartis influenza vaccine. In those distant, forgotten days when physicians followed the maxim, “Do no harm”, and governments were trying to control the pharmaceutical companies instead of their people, a mere 8 years ago, that was enough – they cancelled the vaccine. Considering that 7,027 deaths were attributable to influenza in this period in Italy, 13 deaths for an illness that only caused maybe 10,000 deaths in Australia is clearly also too many.
Well, shouldn’t 13 deaths also be enough to say, no more Covid vaccines? Or have the TGA not heard of the saying, “Do no harm?” That would be amazing.
But I have to say, how amazing something else is too, that at least two of these 13 people the TGA says died seem to have been in my small network of acquaintances. One very healthy woman, a friend of a friend in her thirties, died soon after her second injection; she suddenly dropped dead on the road as she was getting out of her car. And a very good friend of mine dropped dead suddenly on the steps of the emergency department not long after getting his third jab. Both of these had been recently vaccinated and died, of apparently unexplained causes. What an amazing coincidence that I knew two of the thirteen people.
My conclusion is that this is not a coincidence, but that the rate of death from the vaccine is massively understated.
And there are indications it is certainly more than 13 deaths. Amazingly, the TGA’s own database, DAEN, which anyone can look at, contains reports of 939 deaths - the Doctors or people who filed these reports all believed these deaths were linked to Covid vaccination. Did these other 926 deaths all have autopsies done? Can we see them? It seems outrageous that 926 health workers or relatives of patients were wrong in ascribing deaths to the coronavirus, and only 13 were correct.
It’s good to see that John Flint is such a hard, sharp investigative reporter, a tough rock of the news industry, that he managed to mine the data and extract the truth with an adamantine effort of will - it’s a little unfortunate that he overlooked 926 deaths out of 939, but, you know, you can’t expect him to get every little detail right, he’s only human.
The online form may be cumbersome.
Considering how overstretched Doctors and hospitals are today, since they laid off all the Doctors and nurses who refused to get vaccinated or recommend the mRNA shots, it would be surprising if they have time to fill in the online forms to report deaths and injuries from the vaccine. Patients themselves may also fill in reports. I know of no one who had a definite vaccine injury who filled in one of these reports - my own mother had an extreme reaction after the first Pfizer shot which necessitated calling an ambulance - no one filled in the report for her case. I don’t think anyone even told her she could.
This is called the ‘under-reporting factor’ and new data just made available means the URF is almost certainly at least 140. Previously according to peer reviewed studies in the US VAERS database may be as high as 50, which means there may be 50 times as many deaths that have not been reported.
The VAERS online form is reportedly extremely cumbersome and difficult to use, and if you don’t fill every field in quickly enough, the whole report disappears.
VAERS itself admitted in a study to a 6.5 times underreporting rate, even when reports were explicitly requested. A study in 2021 estimated the underreporting rate as 41 times.
The DAEN underreporting rate is surely at least as high as the one VAERS admits to, particularly in view of the fact that Doctors and health practitioners might well have been paranoid about reporting vaccine injuries in view of the AHPRA threats against their registration if they speak out (see the AHPRA March 9 2021 position statement archived here)
The fact of VAERS underreporting has recently been brought into sharp relief by the legal case in the US wherein ICAN forced the CDC to release the data in their v-safe smartphone app, which reveals that 33% of people reported an adverse event following vaccination, and a quarter of those people required hospital or doctor visits.
There are currently 1,644,517 VAERS reports into Covid vaccine side effects. According to Bloomberg, 613 million doses have been given.
That means that the VAERS underreporting factor is actually 124.
It would be reasonable to assume the DAEN underreporting figure is similar.
Considering the TGA’s claim from the beginning that these experimental injections are safe and effective, they certainly have a vested interest in minimising the apparent number of side effects and deaths.
5,000 unexplained deaths.
And strangely enough, we have an increase in mortality, numbering 10,000 deaths, in Australia in the past year. About 5,000 of these were deaths from Covid. The other 5,000 excess deaths are unexplained.
It’s worth noting that the vaccines were rolled out in Australia in February 2021, so this data only reflects a part of the whole vaccine rollout.
I think a fairly honest estimate means that for every person who was saved by the Covid jab, another was killed by the Covid jab. This does not meet the definition of ‘do no harm’, particularly when one considers the deprecation of proper treatments in favour of the experimental vaccines in Australia.
But the one point Mr Flint doesn’t consider is this: we still don’t know the long term effects of the experimental mRNA vaccines. In the next ten or twenty years, there may be many more deaths attributable to the injections than the ones already identified.
If you caught Covid, then died from it, that’s one thing, but once you’ve recovered you’re unlikely to die from it. If you got the jab, though, who knows? This is why we had the Nuremberg code and the medical coercion clause in our constitution and the human rights agreements and medical ethics and the Hippocratic oath.
And considering the underreporting factor, plenty more people were injured, that we are not being told about; presuming that the v-safe app data is applicable in Australia, around 1/3 of the people who were coerced or inveigled into taking these experimental medications suffered side effects.
Are the TGA, WHO, FDA actually trustworthy?
This TGA that tells us there were only 13 deaths from the vaccine is the same TGA, of course, that did not approve ivermectin, which according to their own data elsewhere is perfectly safe* and now is proven to be 92% effective in preventing death and hospitalisation and treating COVID-19, according to a very large study in Brazil. There are very many studies now showing that Ivermectin prevents death and hospitalisation if given early with zinc. But the TGA tells us:
Apparently India, Japan and Brazil are not developed countries - this sounds very like colonialism to me.
Note that one of their references, the World Health Organisation, is certainly not trustworthy. Aside from the US Government, the WHO’s main source of funds is the Bill and Melinda Gates organisation, which also owns millions of shares in Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, and other big Pharma companies. And the chair of the WHO partner organisation UNITAID, Andrew Hill, was caught on video essentially admitting to suppressing the evidence for Ivermectin being a trustworthy medication for Covid, under pressure from ‘someone high up’, possibly Bill Gates or one of his underlings, considering that most of UNITAID’s funding comes from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
WHO is demonstrably not trustworthy: since the 1976 the WHO has been publishing studies showing how one might sterilise women using tetanus shots contaminated with ACG, a pregnancy hormone; in 2014 the evidence is compelling that the WHO gave tetanus shots to women in Kenya that were intentionally designed to sterilise them.
Also the US Food and Drug Administration receives at least half of its funding from the pharmaceutical companies themselves. And considering that the best career pathway for an FDA bureaucrat is straight into the pharmaceutical industry and that the FDA receives half its funding from pharmaceutical companies, it would actually be surprising if vested interest played no part in FDA decisions and pronouncements.
Big Pharma influence on the TGA vaccine advisory board.
The TGA’s vaccine advisory board is hardly neutral: Professor Kristine Macartney is on the World Health Organisation Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety - funded by Bill and Melinda Gates - Professor Joseph Torresi works at the Doherty Institute which received at least $2 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation in the last 5 years, over $5 million from the NIH, $3.9 million from Pfizer, amounts that represent a large proportion of their funding, dwarfing the amount given by the Australian government, and the chair of the TGA vaccine advisory board, Professor Allen Cheng, works at Alfred Health, and has personally received payments from vaccine manufacturers Biocryst, George Clinical, Gilead, GSK and Merck. The TGA itself does not make these conflicts of interest available publicly as far as I can tell.
The scandal of vaccinated deaths being reported as unvaccinated
There is another scandal, too; it is well documented now that UK data showing deaths from vaccination has been corrupted by the fact that many unvaccinated deaths are actually the death of people who were actually vaccinated.
I wonder if that has been happening here?
Mr Flint, if you were a real journalist you’d be looking into that.
Claim: Myocarditis rates are 1 in a thousand and Coronavirus is DANGEROUS....!
Part three of my refutation of the Sunday Times article.
From the Sunday Times article:
Myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, is a “very rare side effect” of the mRNA-based vaccine made by Pfizer and Moderna. Cases usually resolved after a few days with treatment and rest. According to a TGA vaccine safety report in May, it happened in about one to two in every 100,000 people who received the Pfizer jab, and two to three of those who received Moderna. “So far, reports after booster doses are very rare, with myocarditis reported in less than one in every 100,000 people after they receive a booster dose,” it said.
Points:
Myocarditis is not an insignificant or mild side effect - of 780 patients who were diagnosed with myocarditis in a population based study in Taiwan, a quarter died within ten years.
Mr Flint is obviously not sharp enough to actually read the TGA vaccine safety report for himself. The risk of myocarditis is much higher for boys aged 13-17 - 13 cases in 100,000 - that’s over 1 in 10,000 - and young men in their 20s; 20 cases in 100,000 - that’s 1 in 5000 young men who take the vaccine. The risk is actually around 15 cases per 100,000 for the second dose. The TGA is actually not up to date anyhow, rates are possibly much higher among among 16-40 age group according to this study from Israel, 29% according to this study from Thailand
Covid has simply not been fatal to anyone younger than 20 in Australia according to this government page where the graph seems to have gone missing, as has the age and sex data from this page as well (it used to be shown earlier this year but even seems to have disappeared from the wayback machine). The data for children’s deaths from Covid has simply disappeared from the government sites.
I wonder why?
This site, not a government page, https://www.statista.com/statistics/1245896/australia-number-of-coronavirus-deaths-by-age-group-and-gender/ was the only place I could find the number of children who had died of Covid before December 9, 2021.
Only 1 child died.
I finally found a little more information here - the death was an adolescent.
The number of people under 40 who have died of the virus is paltry anyway.
The median age of death from Coronavirus is 84.3. The median age at death for Australians is 81.7 years. That means you’re more likely to die of anything else other than Coronavirus.
Most of the people who died from Covid had pre-existing very serious chronic health conditions, mostly to do with heart and circulation:
So Mr Flint you recommend giving myocarditis to 13 boys in 100,000 and 20 young men in 100,000 to save them from a virus that is extremely unlikely to kill any of them. Good man. You’re recommending giving myocarditis to 1-2 people in 100,000 in order to save them from a virus whose median death age is higher than the median age at death of the Australian population.
Such great investigative journalism.
BTW
* TGA report into the safety of ivermectin 2011:
+
