Common Sense Lost

We continue to face challenges rolling out our childhood nutrition program in Cambodia due to the ongoing pandemic interventions. Hunger remains at dangerous levels across communities. Access to health care, previously very limited, is all but no longer available unless you have money. Lockdown has ended for now but testing and vaccination teams are highly visible and wielding power across communities. The response is promoted strongly by NGOs whose programs now all have a Covid-19 focus. Movement to and around communities is difficult. Expatriate friends stay home to avoid being forced into PCR tests and the once-bustling city streets are reportedly quiet. There is no option to refuse if you are identified, with unaffordable fines and jail terms for anyone declining the mandatory interventions. The test is reported to be put together in factories at a cost of US$2.10 but sells for $9. Those nations whose public health interventions are less linked to massive corruption are safer than others. Sweden being an example of evidence based interventions reappearing after many months of pressure to follow the global panic.

Mass population PCR testing of the young and non-vulnerable is sponsored by WHO, Australian Government, UNICEF, and “humanitarian” agencies. Those with a positive test, many of them vaccinated, face enforced isolation and many report having no access to food during this time. What is the purpose of these interventions in a nation whose median age is 25 years old? Why is this happening in the name of “public health”?

Never before have healthy people been defined as “disease cases”.

A parent of one of the scientists at Panda died from a stroke days after receiving a Covid vaccine a few weeks ago. He was unable to reach his parents after the event because of the loss of travel rights implemented globally for our safety. Many anecdotes appear on social media daily, of odd menstrual patterns in both young and older women among other severe effects such as headaches, neurological symptoms such as weakness and dizziness, vomiting, hearing and vision loss, etc. These are all examples of why a risk-benefit analysis before choosing to take an experimental vaccine is so important. Multiple scientists – virologists, immunologists, microbiologists, toxicologists – have been openly and vehemently warning of the dangers of these experimental vaccines, such as blood clots and auto-immune reactions including risk to male and female fertility; and explaining the physiology of why they believe these are risks. They shout into a tide of excited consensus and of course, face accusations of “conspiracist” and “anti-vaxxer”. There are many but two examples include Dr Michael Yeadon and Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, both of whom speak out at great personal expense and are “fact checked” by employed “fact checkers” on social media platforms regularly.

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in USA has had a massive rise in reports over the past five months. The change in post-vaccine deaths (which are not necessarily causally linked, just as death with a positive PCR test is not necessarily causally linked) looked like this a month ago and has surpassed 4,000 now. In 1999 when there were 15 cases of bowel obstruction associated with a new Rotavirus vaccine, the vaccine rollout was immediately halted. What about our prudence in vaccine safety changed in those two decades?