Reasons for Rejecting the Covid-19 Vaccine and its Mandate

Updated: Sep 19



1. Nuremberg Code - Coercing Canadian citizens into accepting an injection contradicts the Nuremberg Code which requires voluntary and informed consent to any medical treatment:

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. 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, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. (Nuremberg Code, 1)

In addition to the Nuremberg Code, there are other international agreements which coerced vaccination programs contravene including the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (2005) and the Helsinki Declaration (1964).

2. Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Coercing persons into accepting an injection contradicts the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which guarantees all Canadians the freedom of conscience and religion (Article 2) and the right to right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice (Article 7). Therefore, the practice of mandated vaccines is in contravention to the Charter. In particular, it is contrary to the “security of the person”. Security of the person includes a person’s right to control his or her own bodily integrity. It will be engaged where the state interferes with personal autonomy and a person's ability to control his or her own physical or psychological integrity, for example by… imposing unwanted medical treatment (R. v. Morgentaler, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 30 at 56; Carter, supra; Rodriguez, supra; Blencoe, supra at paragraph 55; A.C., supra, at paragraphs 100-102). (33) One of the basic fundamental proofs of freedom is the idea that we, as individual persons, and not some other actor, have control over our own bodies within prescribed moral limits. If one does not have bodily autonomy, one does not have freedom. If coercion is used to force a vaccine into our bodies, we don’t have principal stewardship of our own bodies any longer. Someone else does; namely, the State. If we lose this basic principle, we lose our individual liberties in their most basic and rudimentary form. To relinquish this basic, necessary, and fundamental right, is to open Canadian society to the real risk of losing other fundamental and inalienable rights to totalitarian movements under the guise of health care or other “emergency”.

3. Canadian Case Law - In Canada, informed consent to medical interventions – including vaccines – is the law. (See Cuthbertson vs Rasouli 2013-10-18; 2013 SCC 53). The Court ruled: “The patient’s consent must be given voluntarily and must be informed.” (42)

4. Non-Genetic Discrimination Act (2017) – This federal legislation explicitly prohibits any person from undergoing any genetic test as a condition of employment and other contracts. The legislation states quite clearly: “It is prohibited for any person to require an individual to undergo a genetic test as a condition of (a) providing goods or services to that individual; (b) entering into or continuing a contract or agreement with that individual; or (c) offering or continuing specific terms or conditions in a contract or agreement with that individual.” The PCR test would be considered a genetic test as defined by the Act in relation to Bill S-201, Statutes of Canada 2017: “An Act to prohibit and prevent genetic discrimination” which defines a “genetic test” to mean any test that analyzes DNA, RNA or chromosomes for purposes assessing risks of transmission of diseases, or for monitoring, diagnosis or prognosis. So, in other words, requiring COVID tests as a condition of employment is illegal. Penalties for breaching this law are particularly punitive, reaching as high as one million dollars and imprisonment up to five years. (47)

5. The Ontario Health Care Consent Act, 1996 – This legislation also prohibits any treatment which does not involve consent (Cf. Article 10). (43)

6. Ontario Human Rights Code – Article 1 of the OHRC protects employees on the basis of Creed. According to the Ontario Human Rights Commission: “The right to be free from discrimination based on creed reflects core Canadian constitutional values and commitments to a secular, multicultural and democratic society. People who follow a creed, and people who do not, have the right to live in a society that respects pluralism and human rights and the right to follow different creeds.” (52)

a. Moral (Religious) – These vaccines have used aborted fetal cell lines in their development and testing. Therefore, they represent a direct attack on the dignity of the human person and many religious traditions, undergirded by basic science, believe that life starts at the moment of conception, and therefore to these groups, the development of these particular vaccines represents an anthropological regression of humanity. For those persons, therefore, who oppose this immoral practice and are being coerced into being its beneficiary, it is a direct violation of their consciences and, as such, can never be tolerated by a free and just society which must uphold the genuine conscientious rights of its citizens.

b. Ethical (Religious) – In the Catholic Tradition, it is the moral imperative of all governments and other to uphold the rights of the conscience of its citizens. Vaccines can never be imposed on anyone because, without full consent, such an imposition is an overt attack on the dignity of the human person:

It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility-that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth. However, men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom. (Dignitatis Humane, 2)

Conscience is a judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act that he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he knows to be just and right. It is by the judgment of his conscience that man perceives and recognizes the prescriptions of the divine law… Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. "He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1778, 1782)

Rev. Tad Pacholczyk, Director of Education at the National Catholic Bioethics Centre, confirmed that Catholic teaching is clear when it comes to the topic of mandatory vaccination. “The Church has been clear that vaccination, as the rule, is not a moral obligation. It is something that needs to be voluntary,” Pacholczyk said. “Every individual needs to be, according to conscience, determining which medical interventions are, or are not, appropriate for their particular state in life. So, when you have these blanket mandates, there is a lot of risk; there’s kind of a tendency to paint with too broad of a brush. And, you know, the effect here can be that individual liberty and individual assessment of circumstances are not respected,” he added. (53) Moreover, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Catholic Church’s top doctrinal body, also recently re-affirmed that vaccination is not a moral obligation and must be voluntary. (54)

Ø In summary, any government which coerces its citizens into mandated vaccinations implicitly arrogates themselves to the position of a medical professional who is giving medical counsel. The claim that no one is actually forced to take a vaccination is a vacuous statement when the alternative for those who object to these injections is essentially to live in effective isolation for the foreseeable future if not for the rest of their lives. If that is not the very definition of coercion, then nothing is. Furthermore, it treats everyone as being sick until proven healthy which is tantamount to reversing another fundamental principle in law and justice which is that citizens of a free State are innocent until proven guilty. The precedent established is also very concerning because if informed consent is no longer protected from reprisal in Canadian law, and the violation of a citizen’s conscience is established in practice as well as law, unforeseen future encroachments on Canadian civil liberties and sacrosanct values beyond this crisis are very possible and even likely.


7. Emergency Use, Liability, and Shielding Big Pharma - All the treatments being marketed as COVID-19 “vaccines”, are still in Phase III clinical trials until 2023 (1) and hence, qualify as a medical experiment. People accepting these treatments are essentially test-subjects, and are generally unaware that the injections are not conventional vaccines as they do not contain a virus but instead an experimental gene therapy. The recent “approval” for Pfizer’s vaccine by the FDA on August 23, 2021 only applies to their now licensed version called “COMIRNATY” which is yet to be produced for mass distribution; the original Pfizer vaccine which is currently used received an extension of emergency use authorization from the FDA (34). The question is why this distinction? If the products are identical in substance, then why has the FDA not simply licensed the currently available unbranded “Pfizer/Biontech” vaccine which has been produced in high volume? According to US biosafety expert Dr. Meryl Nass, the FDA simply split the Pfizer vaccine into two products: a branded product (“Comirnaty”), which received a full market license but is currently unavailable in the US (due to “insufficient stocks”); and an unbranded product (“Pfizer/Biontech vaccine”), which is widely available in the US but remains under the existing Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). As the FDA approval letter admitted: “There is no adequate, approved, and available alternative to the emergency use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine to prevent COVID-19.” (58). In other words, governments may be using the unavailable branded product to justify politically motivated vaccination mandates, but they may then deliver the unbranded product to avoid any/or perhaps reduced liability (depending on the program coverage) for vaccine injuries. (57) This particular issue is evolving and will need more clarification as more legal details become available. There are certain reports which state that the COMIRNATY vaccine has the same liability protection as the vaccine approved under the EUA - which basically indemnifies them from loss and shifts any modest payout to the government i.e. the taxpayers.. The issue of civil liability for either versions is very relevant to the safety of the vaccines, at the very least.

8. No Mid or Long-term Data on Health Effects – There are no mid or long-term data available on these novel vaccines. Therefore, we do not know what health consequences await Canadians including cancer, neurological disorders, infertility and a host of other possible and permanent health consequences. We do know, even now, from the warning labels and admissions of the pharmaceutical companies and Health Canada that vaccine risks including Myocarditis, Pericarditis and Bells Palsy. Other studies have linked the vaccines to neurological diseases like Guillain-Barré syndrome. Therefore, Canadians are being coerced into participating in a novel technology and medical experiment whose full health risks have not been properly assessed, understood or revealed. Normal vaccine testing takes 5-10 years or longer to assess the long-term impact. No other coronavirus vaccine (i.e., MERS, SARS-1) has been approved for market, due to antibody-dependent enhancement, resulting in severe illness and deaths in animal models (10). Past history in vaccine development has not been without risks. (49)

9. Vaccine Death Count:

a. Serious Adverse Reactions & Deaths- In the US alone, as of August 13, 2021, there have been 13,627 deaths attributed to the Covid vaccines, more than all previously reported vaccine deaths combined (see chart below), as well as over 623,341 in adverse reactions (2). Of these reactions, 84,466 have been serious (3).

Moreover, even these numbers, as troubling as they may be, are likely underreported by at least several orders of magnitude. According to a Harvard Study from 2010 entitled, Electronic Support for Public Health–Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESP:VAERS), it concludes the following on page 6: “Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported. Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1–13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.”(4)


More than 2 million adverse events and 21,000 deaths have been reported to a European Union (EU) drug reaction database following the use of currently available COVID jabs. The EnduraVigilance system is the EU-wide database for recording vaccine injury reports, as well as other medicine-induced injuries, corresponding to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), jointly run by both the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The system has collated 2,074,410 reports of injuries related to the jabs, including 21,766 fatalities across the 27 member states (not including the United Kingdom). The source related that just under half of all reports (1,021,867) were of serious injuries, classified by the EU agency as corresponding to “a medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.” The highest rate of problematic developments among the four emergency-authorized jabs occurred following the AstraZeneca shot, designed and manufactured in conjunction with Oxford University, which is reportedly linked to 947,675 injuries within the EU. There were 4,740 reports of deaths, a large proportion of which followed the development of nervous system and vascular disorders. A total of 12,080 reports were listed as “reproductive system and breast disorders.” Overall, the recently FDA-approved Pfizer jab, now marketed under the name Comirnaty, was correlated with 833,498 injuries and 10,616 deaths. The system showed that Pfizer’s jab preceded 22,844 blood disorders, 148,477 nervous system disorders, and 910 adverse events related to “pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions,” resulting in 29 deaths. It is unknown if the pregnancy-related deaths were miscarriages. An additional 10,909 reports were for reproductive system disorders. Moderna’s jab, granted “conditional marketing authorization” for use within the EU on January 6, has been flagged for 229,430 injuries and 5,600 deaths on the drug reaction database. Johnson & Johnson, marketed in Europe under the name Janssen, has had 63,807 injuries reported against its jab, with 810 deaths occurring after using the single-dose shot. (35)

The risk of dying from the COVID Vaccines is exponentially higher than dying from the Flu Vaccine. (67)


a. Adverse Events Officially Recognized - Health Canada officially recognizes vaccine risks including Myocarditis and Pericarditis (5) and Bells Palsy (6). Other studies have linked the vaccines to neurological diseases like Guillain-Barré syndrome (7). Recent concerns have now been raised about Moderna and heart inflammation (27), in addition to the Pfizer vaccine having this problem. Numerous virologists, doctors, scientists, and medical experts are issuing dire warnings about the short and long-term effects of COVID-19 injections, including, but not limited to death, blood clots, infertility, miscarriages, Bell’s Palsy, cancer, inflammatory conditions, autoimmune disease, early-onset dementia, convulsions, anaphylaxis, inflammation of the heart (8), as well as thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (72), and antibody dependent enhancement leading to death; this includes children ages 12-17 years old (9). In fact, some observers are starting to openly question why has there been an unexplainable rise in officially "non-Covid" related heart attacks to the order of twelve times since the vaccine rollouts began. (69)

The spike protein that is part of Covid-19, and which all the current vaccines instruct the body to produce is, by itself, pathogenic. Two articles published now confirm this (69). Both demonstrate quite-conclusively that the spike protein alone, absent the rest of Covid-19 "the virus", is pathogenic. All of the current vaccines deliberately produce that spike protein, which by itself causes disease, specifically clotting-related disease, in the body. Deliberately causing the body to produce that pathogen (which then elicits the antibody response) is how all of them work. This means there is no safe way to vaccinate against this disease because introducing the spike into the body, inherently runs the risk of serious clotting-based disorders. (70)

A 10 year Navy Surgeon, Dr. Lee Merritt, has recently sounded the alarm on the number of deaths and serious illnesses that she has determined were caused by the vaccine, including death, cancer, and myocarditis. She claims that more people have died of the vaccine than of the virus. (64) Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA vaccines, recently remarked that “if you are vaccinated and then become infected, your risk of developing serve disease or dying is better than if you were not vaccinated and then become infected with the Delta….if you are vaccinated and then become infected, you MAY have a higher risk of becoming a “superspreader” because you are less likely to show the disease. This has not been measured but it should be.” (30) And while these and many other side-effects are reportedly rare in the short term, the long-term effects of these novel mRna vaccines are still unknown.

There is also recent evidence that the ability of the immune system to fight viruses has been diminished by the use of these vaccines; specifically, the ability to fight SARS-CoV-2 may be affected. Vaccine-induced innate immune tolerance may affect other vaccines; and finally it raises the question about what other parts of the immune system may be affected. (77)

b. Vaccine Death and Historical Context - In 1976, the U.S. government vaccinated 45 million people against pandemic swine flu. The entire program was canceled after reports of just 53 deaths and 450 people who developed Guillain-Barré syndrome, a prevalence of 1 in 100,000 (11). Why are 53 deaths worthy of pulling dangerous vaccines in 1976 but tens of thousands of deaths for these vaccines do not rise to the same level of concern? Our society has lost all sense of historical and scientific context in assessing the safety of these mRNA vaccines.

10. Natural Immunity & Other Treatments– People who have been already infected with COVID have been found to significantly reduce the risk of not only contracting COVID again, but also against hospitalization – for both the original strain of the virus and also the Delta strain. (36) There was some data from Israel that came out recently showing that if a person has had a vaccine, one is 6.7 times more likely to be reinfected than if one has had the COVID disease itself. (37)


Even the State-sanctioned propaganda arms of various governments are starting to bend and question the prevailing vaccine orthodoxy (63). Fauci himself doesn't know how to explain why people who have had COVID should get the vaccines as well. (75)

Moreover, there are promising new alternative treatments to Covid-19 (in addition to the ones already being utilized). The chairman of the Tokyo Medical Association recently announced that the anti-parasite medicine Ivermectin seems to be effective at stopping COVID-19 and publicly recommending that all doctors in Japan immediately begin using Ivermectin to treat COVID (44). India's experience with Ivermectin has been nothing less than astounding (62), as well as all of Africa. See charts below. Fourteen out of fifteen severe COVID-19 patients who were treated in an investigator-initiated interventional open-label clinical study of the drug TriCor (fenofibrate) didn’t require oxygen support within a week of treatment and were released from the hospital, according to the results of a new Hebrew University of Jerusalem study (45). In addition, early treatment with a medication commonly used to treat asthma appears to significantly reduce the need for urgent care and hospitalisation in people with COVID-19, researchers at the University of Oxford have found (46). Natural treatment from severe cases of COVID-19 includes a regiment of Vitamin D, Vitamin C, Zinc, and Quercetin, among other treatment protocols have been very effective in reducing symptoms of the virus.

11. No Uniform Opinion – Opinion is divided in the medical field on many questions surrounding the vaccine beyond the efficacy or safety of the vaccines. The FDA itself was recently heavily criticized for giving “rushed” approval for Pfizer’s newly licensed product by a British major medical journal. (38). The decision made by national medical associations to administer “Boosters” because of waning immunity has also been criticized by the WHO on efficacy and safety concerns. (39) Science has never been a monolithic endeavour. The great value of science is that there are always improvements and new discoveries. To say the science is “settled” brings to mind the old saying, “Science advances funeral by funeral.” That is to say, it is never settled. And yet, the State and Medical authorities are acting in a way that imposes only one way of dealing with Covid (vaccination), even when there a myriad of successful, alternative treatments available and being proposed by leading medical doctors in the field and approved by the FDA – as a prophylactic (28) and post-exposure (29). It is more than disturbing that only one method of addressing COVID is imposed without properly informed patient consent.

12. Masks & Plastic Barriers – Both masks and plastic barriers are also of limited value or negative value. The commonly worn cloth and surgical masks are roughly 10 percent efficient at blocking exhaled aerosols, a University of Waterloo study found. Regarding plastic face shields, though scientists and researchers could not conclusively state whether or not plastic barriers had any impact on the coronavirus, the evidence currently shows that plastic barriers were shown to be disrupters of airflow and ventilation to the point that the virus becomes more transmissible. The barriers were also shown to give people a false sense of security. (40)Dr. Margarite Griesz-Brisson MD, PhD is a Consultant Neurologist and Neurophysiologist with a PhD in Pharmacology, with special interest in neurotoxicology, environmental medicine, neuroregeneration and neuroplasticity. She is the Founder and Medical Director of The London Neurology & Pain Clinic Ltd, Specialized Clinic exclusively on Physiology, Neurotoxicology and Primary Prevention Medicolegal Expert in the USA, UK, Germany, Switzerland, Norway. She explains that “the rebreathing of our exhaled air will without a doubt create oxygen deficiency and a flooding of carbon dioxide. We know that the human brain is very sensitive to oxygen depravation. There are nerve cells for example in the hippocampus, that can’t be longer than 3 minutes without oxygen – they cannot survive. The acute warning symptoms are headaches, drowsiness, dizziness, issues in concentration, slowing down of the reaction time – reactions of the cognitive system. (50)

13. Transmission Public Health England released their latest technical briefing on the variants of concern, Number 20 (August 6, 2021), This data reinforces the picture that had been emerging in recent months of vaccines which do little to prevent infection or transmission (and thus to prevent or stop outbreaks) but which do reduce severe disease and death in the vaccinated, albeit not by as much as was originally claimed. This confirms that vaccination may be a good way of a person at high risk from the disease reducing their personal risk, but it has almost no value as a way of protecting others, so there is no benefit in vaccinating children, introducing vaccine passports domestically or internationally, or coercing young people to get a vaccine which to them is almost all risk and no benefit. (41)

Vaccinated individuals transmit the virus at the same rate as unvaccinated individuals (14). Therefore, restricting unvaccinated people’s freedom is unscientific discrimination. If one can contract COVID from a vaccinated person at the same rate as the unvaccinated, how exactly does stripping the rights away of a large portion of the population help the vaccinated population?

Furthermore, vaccines are intended to protect its recipients. If they do not protect the recipients from the virus, then they do not work, and therefore the problem is with the efficacy of the vaccines themselves, and not with those who choose not to be vaccinated. Restricting the freedom of healthy Canadian citizens does not make the vaccines work.

14. Vaccination effectiveness – Double-dosed Covid vaccines do not prevent infection (13). Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis, Israel's director of public health services, said Sunday that evidence points to the waning immunity in the COVID-19 vaccine, saying her two biggest concerns with the delta variant relate to its level of infectiousness and the rising rate of vaccinated individuals testing positive. "It's 50 percent more infectious than the previous variant, which was 50 percent more infectious than the original one," Alroy-Preis told CBS' Face the Nation, noting that a third of Israel's population has not been covered, particularly Israel's large population of non-vaccinated children. She added that 50 percent of the current infections are vaccinated individuals. "Previously we thought that fully vaccinated individuals are protected, but we now see that vaccine effectiveness is roughly 40 percent." She noted that while effectiveness remains high for severe disease, Israel is seeing diminished protection, particularly for those who have been vaccinated longer. "That, together with the fact that we're seeing lack of response to the vaccine over time, has led us to suggest and allow people to be vaccinated for a third time. It's not just that we're seeing more disease, but that they're getting into severe and critical conditions," she said. (48).

According to the recent studies, antibody levels fell by up to 40% per month in vaccinated participants, versus less than 5% per month in so-called convalescents i.e. the unvaccinated (73). Furthermore, among the immunocompromised, the requirement to be vaccinated with the current COVID vaccines is essentially non-sensical as their effectiveness continues to seriously wane over time, with estimates of 42% to as low as 17% efficacy, and a vaccine for the new strain (the Delta) has not been yet developed (51). From Public Health England's September 3 briefing, observers have noted that vaccine effectiveness fell to 15% in Over-50s, 27% in Under-50s, and although the prevention of death were cut 74%, the trend is downwards, and for Over-50s, it was only 20%. (74)

15. Totalitarian Measures & Logan’s Run: Since the Covid outbreak, Canadians have had to endure lockdowns, the banning on social media of vaccine victim accounts (65), fines, jail, enforceable confinement, religious and civil rights persecution, restriction on travel, psychological aggression, and soon the loss of employment, loss of health care and even access to food (25). In fact, things have gotten so out of control, judges have had to file a criminal complaint against their own governments (66). These are all the actions of a totalitarian state which has been permitted to run roughshod over the constitutional and human rights of Canadians without weighing the steep costs of these draconian measures and lockdowns both in terms of physical and mental health (61). There has been virtually no consideration to these particular consequences. But the most insidious part of these government abuses is the psychological warfare the State has been waging against its own population through a propaganda of fear and lies (71). This “wedge warfare” has effectively split our country, communities, and families and created a “hermeneutic of suspicion” such that the majority who get vaccinated trade their health for their freedom, while the minority who decline the vaccination are forced to relinquish their freedom to defend their health. And yet, the great irony is that the freedom that each group thinks they have gained or lost is actually in the opposite direction. When the VaxPass on our phones turns from that green “checkmark” which granted us the privileges we once called rights into an “expiry notice”, we must surely realize that our “red pill” moment has arrived. That “expiry notice” means that we must scurry along to get our required “booster shots” so that we will be in compliance with the State’s health diktats. This “red pill” moment might cause many to wonder just who has the real freedom – those who live on the steroids of state privileges or those who are truly free and who courageously deprive themselves of these “privileges” so that they can recover them again as “rights” in due time. Historically, no one who gave up their human rights and dignity at the behest of the State was ever considered a hero.

Yesterday's fiction is becoming today's reality....

Most western countries are now recognizing that in light of the waning effects of double-dosed vaccines that booster shots will be necessary (32). The logical questions about the third dose of these vaccines are these: How many of these boosters will I need in the future? Will I be on boosters for the foreseeable future? For the rest of my life? What will these boosters do to my short, mid, and long-term health, and will these boosters weaken my natural immunity to other viruses? If there is a chance of the latter situation developing, is there a risk I will be dependent on the government and its medical agencies to survive this Covid regime? If the government does not approve of my opinions or actions in the future for any issue, will they use such power over me to demand compliance? Do I have any evidence now of the State depriving citizens of their livelihood and rights unless they comply with government directives? What is the probability of the State availing themselves of this option for other “extreme situations”?

16. Proportionality of Threat: The authorities who have made these draconian decisions seemed to have lost all sense of proportion when the “survival” rate defined as the number of deaths over the total population of the U.S. is considered. (Note: the denominator should be the total population, and not just those who are infected) (26):

For those who have been infected with COVID, the statistics are not all that different from above, with the exception of the 70+ age group which only confirms that this "crisis" is essentially isolated to the elderly (largely in retirement and long term health facilities) where targeted measures should have been employed:


Data Synthesis Twenty-three seroprevalence surveys representing 14 countries were included. Across all countries, the median IFR in community-dwelling elderly and elderly overall was 2.4% (range 0.3%-7.2%) and 5.5% (range 0.3%-12.1%). IFR was higher with larger proportions of people >85 years. Younger age strata had low IFR values (median 0.0027%, 0.014%, 0.031%, 0.082%, 0.27%, and 0.59%, at 0-19, 20-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, and 60-69 years).

The fatal numbers above could be even further reduced considering:

  • an early and aggressive education campaign by government and medical professionals of preventative natural and conventional medicines could have significant results in reducing serious illness and death (see paragraph 10 above);

  • there are other promising alternative treatments available after contracting the virus (see paragraph 10 above);

  • the deployment of a risk-based strategy which target high-risk groups i.e. older-age groups and groups subject to pre-existing conditions (68);

  • the transparent and honest reporting of true Covid deaths, instead of unethical, sloppy, or paranoid protocols which inflate the number of deaths (i.e. patients dying “with” COVID vs. “of” COVID) (59) for disingenuous and financial reasons (60). The Atlantic reported the following: Another portion of the patients in this tally are in the hospital for something unrelated to COVID, and discovered that they were infected only because they were tested upon admission. How many patients fall into each category has been a topic of much speculation. In August, researchers from Harvard Medical School, Tufts Medical Center, and the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System decided to find out. Researchers have tried to get at similar questions before. For two separate studies published in May, doctors in California read through several hundred charts of pediatric patients, one by one, to figure out why, exactly, each COVID-positive child had been admitted to the hospital. Did they need treatment for COVID, or was there some other reason for admission, like cancer treatment or a psychiatric episode, and the COVID diagnosis was merely incidental? According to the researchers, 40 to 45 percent of the hospitalizations that they examined were for patients in the latter group. (76)

For two separate studies published in May, doctors in California read through several hundred charts of pediatric patients, one by one, to figure out why, exactly, each COVID-positive child had been admitted to the hospital. Did they need treatment for COVID, or was there some other reason for admission, like cancer treatment or a psychiatric episode, and the COVID diagnosis was merely incidental? According to the researchers, 40 to 45 percent of the hospitalizations that they examined were for patients in the latter group. (77)

17. Prominent Doctors & Virologists Expressing Concern:

a. French virologist and Nobel Prize winner Luc Montagnier – Montagnier called mass vaccination against the coronavirus during the pandemic “unthinkable” and a historical blunder that is “creating the variants” and leading to deaths from the disease. Many epidemiologists know it and are “silent” about the problem known as “antibody-dependent enhancement,” Montagnier said. “It is the antibodies produced by the virus that enable an infection to become stronger,” he said in an interview with Pierre Barnérias of Hold-Up Media earlier this month. Vaccination leading to variants While variants of viruses can occur naturally, Montagnier said that vaccination is driving the process. “What does the virus do? Does it die or find another solution?” “It is clear that the new variants are created by antibody-mediated selection due to the vaccination.” (56)

Video URL:

b. Peter McCullough, internist, cardiologist, epidemiologist, Professor of Medicine at Texas A & M College of Medicine, the President at the Cardiorenal Society of America, Editor-in-Chief of Cardiorenal Medicine and of Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, and a Senior Associate Editor at American Journal of Cardiology - He maintains that, first, the virus doesn’t spread among asymptomatic people. Second, asymptomatic people should not get tested, as it is “generating false positives, creating extra cases.” Third, natural immunity gained after having the virus is “robust, complete, and durable.” Fourth, COVID-19 and even the variants are easily treatable at home with early intervention. Fifth, the coronavirus jabs by Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, and AstraZeneca are “right now are obsolete.” In fact, McCullough pointed out that the experimental “vaccines” must “be considered unsafe and unfit for human use.” He mentioned some of the dangerous side effects brought on by the injection. Meanwhile, he also said that safe and effective medicines and treatments have not been promoted, even though they have saved lives — and could save more. (56)


c. Dr. Robert Malone is the discoverer of in-vitro and in-vivo RNA transfection and the inventor of mRNA vaccines, while he was at the Salk Institute in 1988. “This is precisely what one would see if antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) was happening,” Malone said regarding higher virus levels among the vaccinated. “What is antibody dependent enhancement? Briefly, it’s that the vaccine causes the virus to become more infectious than would happen in the absence of vaccination, would cause the virus to replicate at higher levels than in the absence of infection.” (See further ADE explanation here) “This is the vaccinologist’s worst nightmare. It happened with the respiratory syncytial virus and in the ‘60s and caused more child deaths in vaccine recipients than unvaccinated. It happened with Dengvaxia, the dengue vaccine,” Malone continued. “And it’s happened with virtually every other coronavirus vaccine development program, certainly in humans, known in history, and it’s what the vaccinologists like myself have been warning about since the outset, is the risk of antibody dependent enhancement.” Malone said that antibody dependent enhancement seems most apparent in people injected with Pfizer’s vaccine. “So, we now know that the Pfizer protection is waning at six months,” he said. “And what the data seem to suggest is those who have received Pfizer, which is probably the least immunogenic of the three in terms of durability, length of protection, people that are now in the waning phase of the immune response to the Pfizer vaccine seem to be getting infected.” “Notice they keep talking about Pfizer and not about the other two. So, this suggests this is exactly what you would anticipate, is the window of greatest susceptibility to antibody dependent enhancement is in this long tapering phase as the vaccine response declines.” (56)


d. Byram Bridle is a viral immunologist from the University of Guelph - Bridle stressed that there is no evidence that the unvaccinated are causing a rise in cases — especially those associated with new variants — as this goes against the established orthodoxy on how viruses and vaccines work. In Bridle’s expert opinion, the inability of coronavirus vaccines to kill the virus and its narrow focus on the “single protein” are a recipe for the mutations that could be leading to the proliferation of the novel variants being bandied about by politicians and the media. “The principles are this: if you have a biological entity that’s prone to mutation, and the SARS Coronavirus-2 like all coronaviruses is prone to mutation… and you apply a narrowly focused selective pressure that is non-lethal and you do this over a long period of time, this is the recipe for driving the emergence of novel variants, and that’s exactly what we are doing,” Bridle explained. “Our vaccines are focused on a single protein of the virus, so the virus only has to alter one protein, and the vaccines don’t come close to conferring sterilizing immunity, people who are vaccinated still get infected.” (56)


e. Christina Parks holds a Ph.D. in Cellular and Molecular Biology, Dr. Parks testified on August 19 in favor of Michigan legislatopm, which would “prohibit discrimination against an employee or volunteer who declines or has not received certain vaccinations, including for COVID-19.” Besides addressing the particular scientific issues concerning the more problematic elements of the vaccines, she broached the taboo subject of the mistrust of the government when it comes to issues of medicine and health.


f. Ryan Cole is the CEO and Medical Director of Cole Diagnostics, one of the largest independent labs in the State of Idaho. Dr. Cole is a Mayo Clinic trained Board Certified Pathologist. He is Board Certified in anatomic and clinical pathology. He has expertise in immunology and virology and also has subspecialty expertise in skin pathology. “I am concerned about the lack of long term safety data, because this vaccine is simply too new. We have never tried an mRNA vaccine in humans before. I am concerned about the implications of injection of foreign, synthetic mRNA and the antibody reaction which cannot be reversed. It concerns me that large numbers of individuals are being essentially enrolled in a long term phase III clinical trial for the vaccine without being fully informed of this, with no ability for recompense if injured or in case of death. I am concerned by the number of adverse event and deaths that have been reported in correlation with this vaccine administration.” He is also concerned at the increase in endometrial cancer in his practice which may be as a result of the vaccines.


g. Dr. Martin Kulldorff is a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a biostatistician and epidemiologist at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital. He helped develop the CDC’s current system for monitoring potential vaccine risks, and he is also one of the co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, which argued for “focused protection” of the most vulnerable, instead of lockdowns. Dr. Kulldorff stated in an interview: There’s a push both for vaccine passports and vaccine mandates. If people want to have a job and stay at the job, they are required to take the vaccine or they’ll be fired. If they want to study at the university, many universities are requiring vaccines for all the students. So there are these vaccine mandates and vaccine passports. In New York City, for example, now they’re requiring restaurants to require vaccinations for people who go to the restaurants. That is a very coercive way to get people to vaccinate. And that’s very bad for public health. One question is, “Why do you coerce people who are immune or people who are young, who have very small risk, when the vaccines are much more needed in for older people in other places?” So that’s an ethical aspect of it. I think it is very unethical to do so. The other aspect is that if you force something on people, if you coerce somebody to do something, that can backfire. Public health has to be based on trust. If public health officials want the public to trust them, public health officials also have to trust the public. I’ve been working on vaccines for almost two decades now. One thing that we’ve always tried to do is to maintain good confidence in the vaccines.


h. Professsor Sucharit Bhakdi MD, Professor Emeritus of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, Former Chair, Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz (Medical Doctor and Scientist) (Germany and Thailand) - “This is a disastrous situation,” Bhakdi says, “because the spike protein itself is now sitting on the surface of the cells, facing the bloodstream. It is known that these spike proteins, the moment they touch platelets, they active them [the platelets], and that sets the whole clotting system going. The second thing that should happen, according to theory, is that the waste products of this protein that are produced in the cell, are put in front of the ‘door’ of the cell … and is presented to the immune system. The immune system, especially the lymphocytes, recognize these and will attack the cells, because they don’t want them to make viruses or viral parts. And the viral parts are now being made in locations where viral parts would never, ever reach [naturally], like the vessel wall in your brain …If that ‘tapestry’ of the wall [i.e., the lining of the blood vessel] is then destroyed, then that is the signal for the clotting system to [activate], and create a blood clot. And this happens with all of these vaccines because the gene [the instruction to make spike protein] is being introduced to the vessel wall.”


i. Doctors for Covid Ethics Signatories: This group, comprising over 160 doctors has written three open letters to the European Medicines Agency regarding COVID-19 vaccine dangers. In those letters they have insisted upon evidence that risks of clotting, bleeding and platelet abnormalities were appropriately ruled out in legitimate empirical trials prior to human use. They foresaw deaths and harm from clotting, warning of these dangers before blood clots led to vaccine suspensions around the world. Source:

j. Christian Perronne - Perronne has served as chairman of such important French health committees as the National Consultation Group on Vaccination or Technical Committee on Vaccination (CTV) and HSCP the French High Council on Public Health, the Infectious and Tropical Diseases Teaching College (CMIT), the Infectious Diseases Federation (FFI, which he co-founded), and the National Medical and Healthcare products Safety Agency (ANSM). ANSM examines the health risks of medicines and is France’s only regulator of biomedical research. Perronne was also on the Scientific Council of the French Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research Institute (IMMI/INSERM) until 2013. On the international level, Perronne has served as Vice President of the European Advisory Group to the World Health Organization.


18. Improper Use of the PCR Tests – The purported increase in “cases” is a direct consequence of increased testing through the inappropriate use of the PCR instrument to diagnose so-called COVID-19. It has been well established that the PCR test was never designed or intended as a diagnostic tool and is not an acceptable instrument to measure this so-called pandemic. Its inventor, Kary Mullis, has clearly indicated that the PCR testing device was never created to test for coronaviruses (15). Mullis warns that, “the PCR Test can be used to find almost anything, in anybody. If you can amplify one single molecule, then you can find it because that molecule is nearly in every single person”. In light of this warning, the current PCR test utilization, set at higher amplifications, is producing up to 97% false positives (16). Therefore, any imposed emergency measures that are based on PCR testing are unwarranted, unscientific, and quite possibly fraudulent. An international consortium of life-science scientists has also detected 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level in a 3-peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 (17). In November 2020, a Portuguese court ruled that PCR tests are unreliable (18). On December 14, 2020, the WHO admitted the PCR Test has a ‘problem’ at high amplifications as it detects dead cells from old viruses, giving a false positive (19). On Feb 16, 2021, BC Health Officer Bonnie Henry, admitted PCR tests are unreliable (20) . On April 8, 2021, the Austrian court ruled the PCR was unsuited for COVID testing (21) . On April 8, 2021, a German Court ruled against PCR testing stating, “the test cannot provide any information on whether a person is infected with an active pathogen or not, because the test cannot distinguish between “dead” matter and living matter (22) ”. On May 8, 2021, the Swedish Public Health Agency stopped PCR Testing for the same reason (23). On May 10th, 2021, Manitoba’s Chief Microbiologist and Laboratory Specialist, Dr. Jared Bullard testified under cross-examination in a trial before the court of the Queen's Bench in Manitoba, that PCR test results do not verify infectiousness and were never intended to be used to diagnose respiratory illnesses (24).

19. Profits and Criminality - American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Company Inc. (hereinafter together "Pfizer") were fined $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice, to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from the illegal promotion of certain pharmaceutical products. (31) And that was only one settlement. Does it not strike us as troubling that one of the leading suppliers of the COVID vaccines was involved in such activity? The popular quip: “What could go wrong?” comes to mind when considering ramifications to the zealous promotion of these vaccines. Furthermore, there have been stark admissions from the medical bureaucracy who admitted that there exists a “perverse incentive” for hospitals to classify deaths as being coronavirus related when the virus didn’t cause the death. Lawmakers voiced concern about the financial incentives to report the deaths as COVID when there was uncertainty as to the definitive cause, similar to what occurred during the HIV epidemic. (60)


John Pacheco

Original Posting: August 30, 2021

Latest Revision: September 17, 2021



Note: Much of the text provided in this report is a compilation of texts from the sources noted in the footnoted references.

The information in this paper does not purport to offer legal or medical advice, and should not be relied on for such. Readers are cautioned to seek out their own legal and medical advice with qualified professionals.




2. |


4. report-2011.pdf



7. |



10. |

11. |


13. | |

14. | |










24. |





29. | | |

30. Robert Malone Twitter Account postings, August 17, 2021




34. |

35. |

36. | | |

37. |


39. | |


41. | |

42. |









51. |





56. | | |






62. || the-indian-state-of-uttar-pradesh |


64. |





(69) |