Did you hear the joke about Covid? Unless you’re sick or elderly you probably won’t get it. Last year, the Australian Bureau of Statistics calculated the risk of dying of Covid if you caught it, for women aged under 60, the Case Fatality Rate (or CFR) was 0.04 per cent. For men under 60, it was 0.1 per cent, the same CFR as flu in an average year.
That risk may look astonishingly low considering Australian governments have spent billions avoiding infection — leaving aside all the other personal, societal, economic and health costs — and yet it greatly overstates the danger because more than 72 per cent of all people who died with Covid in Australia had at least one pre-existing chronic condition listed on the death certificate such as dementia (over 72 per cent), chronic cardiac conditions (over 30 per cent), other conditions that weaken the immune system including diabetes, hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (15 per cent) and blood and lymph cancers (all cancers together made up 12 per cent). That data, similar to statistics collated overseas, was released a year ago on 28 October 2020. It’s not hard to imagine why it hasn’t been updated. It hardly fits the narrative of a pandemic plague that has been prosecuted relentlessly for the last eighteen months.
Yet for no group does the risk of Covid look slighter than for little children. In the US, for those aged 5-11, there have been 1.8 million cases and only 138 Covid-related deaths. That’s a case fatality rate of 0.007 per cent. As with older people, those at greatest risk of severe Covid and deaths are children with underlying medical conditions, such as asthma, diabetes and obesity, who made up two-thirds of severe Covid cases. There were 8,622 hospitalisations, or 0.5 per cent of cases. Both statistics overstate the risk as so many children who are infected are asymptomatic and not tested.
A threat so much smaller than flu poses could not, in a rational world, justify the approval of an experimental drug, with zero long-term safety data, for a segment of the population with so little susceptibility to anything other than Covid sniffles. It would only be considered for those at risk. Yet the US Food and Drug Administration’s advisory panel has just voted to authorise a Pfizer vaccine for children aged 5-11.
Pfizer admits that the number of children in its trial was too small to detect the risk of myocarditis and said it would not be studied until after the vaccine was authorised. To test short-term safety, of the 3,000 children who were injected with the vaccine, only 750 were included in the safety analysis; one group was studied for two months, the other for two-and-a-half weeks.
Pfizer seems to have used this ‘technique’ of selectively presenting safety data to avoid mentioning a child who was seriously injured in its trials on 12-15 year-olds; Maddie de Garay was a healthy 13-year-old until her second Pfizer shot left her crippled by neurological disorders. She had to be fed through a tube and was confined to a wheelchair.
In the current trial, children experienced fever, chills, headaches, vomiting and muscle pain but Pfizer claims that all serious events were unrelated to the vaccine. Nonetheless, adverse events — mild, moderate and severe — occurred more frequently in the vaccine group including psychiatric DISORDERS, blood and lymphatic disorders, skin and subcutaneous disorders including Henoch-Schönlein purpura (inflammation of the blood vessels), immune system disorders, gastro-intestinal bleeding, severe fever and severe decline in neutrophils which fight bacterial infection and is normally caused by chemotherapy, autoimmune diseases and or vitamin and mineral deficiencies.
None of this daunted the FDA panel. One member who voted in favour of authorisation said, ‘We’re never gonna learn about how safe this vaccine is unless we start giving it. That’s just the way it goes’.
Not surprisingly, given that even the ‘mild’ adverse reactions to injection are worse than Covid infection in most healthy children, Pfizer also argues that children should be vaccinated to prevent Sars-CoV-2 transmission. This is absurd. As in its trials with older people, it didn’t test participants for asymptomatic infection, presumably because the data would not help its case. It claims its vaccine is 91 per cent effective against symptomatic infection, but the study only lasted for two months after vaccination. Real world evidence and numerous trials show protection wanes precipitously with Pfizer itself calling for booster shots in older cohorts at six months.
Far from representing a dangerous reservoir of the virus, studies have shown that children are more likely to be infected by adults than to infect them. In addition, at least 17 studies have also shown that infection-acquired immunity is more enduring and robust than ephemeral vaccine-acquired immunity including a study out this week from Yale which estimated that it lasts at least three times longer.
Vaccinating children may ultimately hurt the broader community. Experience with flu has shown that the layered immunity that comes from children being naturally infected prevents the sort of pandemic spread that occurs when the entire community has develops identical immunity. Right on cue, a vaccine-evading variant has arrived to demonstrate the downside of mass vaccination to a mutating virus. The vaccinated are locked in to fighting the Wuhan strain which no longer exists except in the laboratory it leaked from and those who have collected it since.
This week, horrified Democrats and Republicans demanded that Dr Fauci explain reports that his National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) funded experiments on beagle puppies in which they were eaten alive by sandflies and had their vocal cords cut so that their howls of agony wouldn’t disturb their tormentors.
It comes after the National Institutes of Health, the overarching institution of which NIAID and Fauci are a critical part, finally admitted last week to funding research on bat coronaviruses in the Wuhan laboratories, after Fauci had testified on numerous occasions before Congress that US taxpayers had never financed this type of ‘gain-of-function research’ which was banned in the US precisely because it was considered too dangerous as it could lead to the escape of a more deadly and more infectious virus. Fauci was opposed to the ban and infamously said in 2012 that ‘the risk-benefit ratio of such research clearly tips towards benefiting society’.
In the face of such astonishing cruelty, barefaced lies and indifference to danger, why should anyone expect children to escape this sacrifice to Moloch. Hand over your infants and your puppies and they will be turned into lab rats. That’s just the way it goes.
Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.
You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10