Australian cardiologist warns of mRNA injury but Canberra's eyes are on a vax-pushing review that urges: 'buy MORE product'
Canberra is willfully blind to the mRNA vaccine disaster as politicians listen to industry-linked vax-pushers instead of the medical experts sounding the alarm
Australian cardiologist Christopher Neil has this week issued a fresh warning that the covid vaccines are causing injuries, as signals of harm are being ignored by policymakers.
Dr Neil’s cautionary message comes after Australia’s vaccine advisory board ATAGI recommended yet another injection of covid vaccine be made available to the public.
“There has to be an acknowledgement that this recommendation has been made despite unprecedented signals of harm and a stifling of debate,” Dr Neil, president of the Australian Medical Professionals’ Society (AMPS), told the Canberra Weekly.
Dr Neil outlined the escalating reports of injury caused by the covid injectable products in an open letter sent to every Australian parliamentarian and all the medical boards last year.
“To date, Adverse Events flowing from these products are at historically unprecedented levels globally and continue to rise. And again, to date, no other drugs in human history have reported more deaths, illnesses, injuries, and disabilities … To be clear, the TGA has received more Adverse Event reports in 2021 through June 2022 for the COVID-19 vaccines, than they have been seen for all other vaccines in the preceding 50-year period.”
However Dr Neil’s warning, together with that of other prominent cardiologists, immunologists and medical professionals worldwide, has fallen on deaf ears.
Canberra is not listening.
So who is Canberra listening to?
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is listening to Bill Gates, who flew in last month to talk in person about health and climate change.
Gates’ charity, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, uses its vast wealth to buy medical policy and push covid vaccines (more on this below).
The government is also listening to Professor Jane Halton, a former Department of Health secretary, who is not only on the board of Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), but was re-elected chair in 2021 for another five-year term.
This is important because CEPI led the Gates’ foundation’s push for the development and production of covid vaccine products.
CEPI led this push together with the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), which says on its website that it shapes the vaccine market for the Gates’ Foundation.
CEPI was founded in Davos, Switzerland, by the governments of Norway and India, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Wellcome Trust (created by one of the founders of pharma giant GSK), and the World Economic Forum which is an industry lobby group for large corporations.
Professor Halton was the principle reviewer in the influential Review of COVID-19 Vaccine and Treatment Purchasing and Procurement, released to Health Minister Mark Butler on 19 September 2022.
You know it is influential because Minister Butler announced the independent review on 27 September 2022 with a media release, stating: “The Government will now carefully consider the recommendations in the report as part of its long-term strategy to manage COVID-19”.
The government then shaped the media reporting by only releasing 6 pages of the 153 page report, stating the rest was “commercial in-confidence”. Professor Halton was available to talk to all the media, to push the key message of buying more product and speeding up the approvals process.
Professor Halton held a press conference saying pre-pandemic processes were “not fit for purpose”.
"And I think the thing we all knew was that this was a race," she said, as reported by the ABC.
"We actually had to have as responsive a regulatory context as we were seeing in the vaccine development world … we needed our regulatory systems, our funding and our procurement systems to move at great speed."
CEPI, the organisation Professor Halton is chair of, also wants to push more vaccines at greater speed.
CEPI says on its website that its mission is to have vaccines produced in 100 days.
Of course that would mean wiping away product safety regulations that have protected the public from inadequately tested medical products, which may cause long-term health problems that do not surface for several months or even years.
The remainder of the 153-page procurement report has now been released on the Department of Health and Aged Care’s Freedom of Information disclosure log, here.
There are parts that are redacted, however much of what remains is shocking.
PROCUREMENT REPORT EXAGGERATES COVID THREAT
A government forming policy on exaggerated disease severity claims may purchase unnecessary product or be tempted to relax safety requirements due to a false perception of extreme danger.
This report is what our policy-makers are basing their purchasing and policy decisions on - and its summary of covid’s severity is exaggerated, misleading and based on outdated information.
From page 10:
“While most COVID-19 cases present with mild to moderate symptoms prior to vaccination, approximately 20% of cases are severe with severe symptoms mostly occurring in individuals aged 50 years or older.”
The term “severe” is not defined - but this is clearly not true now and likely never was. If you take “severe” to mean a trip to hospital, Australia’s hospitals were never full of 20 per cent of the unvaccinated population.
The reference given for this claim is: “‘SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: Status Report’, Immunit, 2020, Vol. 52. 4 s.l.”
It’s a status report from the journal Immunity from 2020 by Fatima Amanat and Florian Krammer, found here. That article quotes the 20% “severity” figure from five earlier studies from Wuhan on the earliest patients in hospital, when they were still calling it “2019 Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia in Wuhan”.
That is totally obsolete and has been for years.
That figure is from the earliest data in 2020, for the extinct Wuhan strain, which itself was overstated in its severity due to no ability to calculate the correct infection fatality rate.
The mild Omicron strain, from which all strains now derive, has been universally acknowledged to be orders of magnitude less severe than this - but this is the figure offered to government to characterise covid as of 19 September 2022.
The review later acknowledges Omicron has emerged as the dominant variant in January 2021 but never mentions how mild it is, or that the previous scary figure is obsolete.
Instead, the report piles on fear-porn for new variants, stating:
“It is also unclear what level of infectiousness or severity new variants may have … A catastrophic variant which renders some or all existing vaccines completely or partially ineffective cannot be ruled out”
The summary goes on to overstate the risk of covid.
In those unvaccinated and over the age of 80 years, the case fatality rate is over 10%. COVID-19 illness is generally milder in children and is often asymptomatic. The frequency of severe illness from COVID-19 is lower in adolescents than in adults, with approximately 4% to 7% of adolescents experiencing severe outcomes.4 Across all ages, the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR), or the likelihood of mortality from infection prior to vaccination, is estimated between 0.5% and 1%.5 Most deaths contributing to the IFR occur in those over the age of 70 years.
There is no evidence that unvaccinated people have a case fatality rate of more than 10 per cent and no reference was given for this claim. Those aged over 80, especially living in care homes, are the most at risk of dying from covid and their case fatality rate is over 10 per cent. Covid overwhelmingly affects the frail-aged. Conflating over-80s with everyone “unvaccinated” is misleading.
According to Stanford University professor John Ioannidis, widely regarded as the Stephen Hawking of epidemiology, the unvaccinated covid infection fatality rate was grossly overstated from the start.
In January 2023, he published a peer-reviewed study, considered definitive, of the true infection fatality rates of covid for everyone aged under 70 (which is the bulk of the population).
The study found across 31 countries before vaccination, that the median infection fatality rate (IFR) of covid was just 0.095% for people aged under 70.
Put into table form, the Ioannidis study found the following:
Oh. That’s a lot less dangerous than the review estimate of 0.5% to 1%.
This scare figure came from “B Salzberger et al., ‘Epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2’, Infection, 2021, Vol. 49.”
This paper can be found here.
It was published in October 2020, again - outdated. Worse, it relied in part on the long-disgraced Imperial College of London modelling.
Salzeberger et al says:
“Investigators from the Imperial College, London, have first established a mathematical model to estimate age dependent case- and infection fatality rates from a high number of cases….
There is yet no single consenset estimate for the IFR, but most models calculate this parameter between 0.5 and 1” - Salzberger, B, et al, Infection.
Why is the Australian Government making decisions on data based on old reports that are this weak and misleading?
The goverment summary goes on in this misleading fashion. Almost every line can be picked apart in this way. Do you honestly think 7% of adolescents suffer “severe” covid? Really? It’s gone through schools already - did you see 7% of adolescents in hospital? Please.
VACCINE INJURIES, MANDATES, NOT MENTIONED
The vaccine summary section emphasises the great risk take by large corporations in creating product at speed, but does not mention the enormous risk of consumers injecting hastily-tested product into their arms.
No mention was made of the risk to Australian taxpayers of paying $8 billion for vaccine products that healthy under-70s never needed, or of being forced to take them under threat of their jobs, or of having an industry-funded regulator (the TGA) spending just $5 million policing their safety with post-marketing surveillance.
No mention was made of the escalating vaccine injuries even though this was well-known by September last year, and cardiologists in particular have been sounding the alarm since the products were first rolled out.
The review does mention the vaccines’ lack of effectiveness in the face of new variants - but only to state the need for the government to buy more in future, as per page 15:
“Similarly, the availability of new vaccines which more effectively protect against (re)infection, severe disease, and death will be important in managing COVID-19 going forward if/when they become available and would therefore have a high cost-benefit.”
There’s no benefit in a product that most people don’t need. But the review has no debate about need. Natural immunity from prior infection was not mentioned, despite long being known to be broader and more durable than any vaccine.
An impartial procurement review might have characterised the widespread refusal of boosters as a sensible decision by Australians not to take a product that doesn’t work and has terrible side-effects - and urge the government not to buy any more.
Instead, the review said it was: “a lack of awareness of the importance of boosters, inconsistent messaging from health authorities, and hesitancy by some members of the public”.
In the conclusions section, the review states:
Australia’s COVID-19 vaccine program has achieved high public vaccination rates by creating access to the supply of multiple safe and effective vaccine products.
This is an outright lie. The high public vaccination rates were achieved by forcing people to choose between their jobs and getting injected with a product the government pushed on them. People who said no got sacked. They then lost their home and all their financial security, not being able to pay the mortgage and bills.
There was no free choice it was forced on workers in nearly every industry and where there were no mandates, the large corporations such as supermarket chains and banks mandated them anyway.
NOT MENTIONED IN PROCUREMENT REVIEW:
There is no mention in the independent report of the easy and cheap measures people can take to prevent severe covid - which would be relevant in a procurement review that government is using to plan the tax spend.
For example: losing weight - obesity is the second biggest predictor of a severe covid outcome after age, this is free and available to everyone.
Or taking Vitamin D supplements - as Vitamin D deficiency has been known since 2021 to be a risk factor for covid hospitalisation.
Natural immunity from prior infection was ignored by the review, despite top doctors saying from the start that it was broad, robust and durable.
Ivermectin is not mentioned. It is a cheap, safe, repurposed anti-viral and anti-inflammatory drug shown in more than 90 studies to help against covid. It was banned for covid use by the industry-funded TGA after lobbying from pharmaceutical companies that profit from its competitors.
WHAT IS PROMOTED: PROFITS FOR PHARMA
The conclusion on page 67 of the review urges the government to keep buying more products forever and normalises it, even though these products may not be needed.
COVID-19 vaccine and therapeutic access will become a normal and ongoing function of Australian health programs when ‘COVID-stable’ is achieved;
The question is never put: Do we need more vaccines for covid? If so do we only need a small amount for the elderly and vulnerable? Do we need these expensive, patented therapeutics? Can repurposed generics like Ivermectin help? Should we promote better health and improved Vitamin D access especially for elderly people who are most at risk? You would expect these questions to be addressed but they do not exist in the review government uses for purchasing decisions.
Instead, several nasty, new, expensive drugs were profiled for the benefit of government purchasing, including:
Merck Sharp & Dohme: Molnupiravir (Lagevrio).
New and profitable, Molnupiravir inhibits viral replication by causing mutations in the virus’ genome, creating monsters in the next generation. Insert enough errors and you prevent the virus replicating, as Forbes describes it. A risky technology.
Merck had a safe and effective product already that stops viral replication: Ivermectin was a simple protease inhibitor invented by Merck - but rubbished by them after they created an expensive alternative.
Remdesivir (Veklury), invented by Gilead and made by Pfizer, is a drug that causes renal failure and is so ineffective that even the Gates-funded World Health Organisation originally recommended against it. They have since approved it, even though studies show it provides only minor improvements in outcome, slightly reducing the days to recovery.
Paxlovid, made by Pfizer, is a protease inhibitor inferior to Ivermectin, and works in a different way. It’s made from a combination of nirmatrelvir and the old HIV-drug ritonavir. It causes a rebound effect most notably seen in US President Joe Biden.
And how does this independent report describe these profit-based products?
Antiviral agents are a promising COVID-19 treatment option that can reduce disease severity, associated mortality and health system burden.
This is the procurement report that will shape government policy and not the voices of dissenting medical experts who have warned of the problems but have been pushed aside.
Letters From Australia has attempted via email to contact review lead author Professor Halton and Professor Peter Collignon who assisted, to reply to the points raised. This story will be updated with any response.
TOP DOCTORS IGNORED, CENSORED
The government and corporate media simply ignored AMPS’s warnings: no press conference was thrown for Dr Christopher Neil.
The respected cardiologist visited Canberra earlier this month to meet federal politicians to call for them to end the vaccine mandates - still in force in many workplaces - and to end the medical censorship.
Only a handful of senators have taken his warnings seriously: Senators Gerard Rennick (Liberal National Party of Queensland), Malcolm Roberts (One Nation) and Ralph Babet (United Australia Party) all met Dr Neil.
The calls of the vaccine injured are getting louder - even former Australian Medical Association head Dr Kerryn Phelps has joined the chorus calling for reform. Both she and her wife Jackie Stricker-Phelps were vaccine injured. They have started a group called CoVerse to advocate for the vaccine injured.
Health Minister Mark Butler has ignored these voices.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese preferred to meet Bill Gates.
HOW THE GATES FOUNDATION PUSHES VACCINES
Gates’ charity organ, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, has an endowment worth US$50 billion as of 2021, which it uses to buy medical influence and push covid vaccines (more on this below).
In its 2021 annual report, the foundation’s chief executive Mark Suzman praised the “safe and effective” vaccines and stated the foundation’s desire to push them on the developing world.
“2021 was a study in contrasts. It began with one of humanity’s great achievements – the rollout of safe, effective COVID-19 vaccines – but concluded with an unacceptable disappointment: On New Year’s Eve 2021, roughly 3 billion people, most of whom lived in low-income countries, were still waiting for their first shot.
The Gates Foundation Trust, which holds the Gates Foundation money, owned a $553.4 million investment in healthcare equities as at 30 December, 2021, up 31 per cent from $420.9 million in 2020.
The Gates Foundation buys medical policy influence. It is the second biggest donor to the World Health Organisation. Bill Gates has no formal medical training or public health qualifications, yet top-five medical journal, New England Journal of Medicine, published his opinion piece in February 2020 on how to respond to covid, calling it a once-in-a-century pandemic.
It donated $400,000 to the BBC according to its 2021 financial statement, for “water, sanitation and hygiene” and that same year, the BBC reported positively on the foundation’s activities.
Bill Gates told The Lowy Institute on his recent visit to Australia that the covid vaccines wane, lose protection and aren’t that great - but he and his foundation are still promoting them, and are now lobbying for Australia to help pay to send them to third world countries, that now don’t need them.
That’s being co-ordinated through Covax - a program linked to CEPI, Gavi and the Gates-funded WHO. Starting to see the pattern here?
Update: 26 February 2023. Adds section on vaccines, several other edits, adds graph of Covax logo, adds pars and tweet for CoVerse, link to video of Prime Minister Albanese meeting Bill Gates and talking about vaccines.
Update: 27 February 2023. Adds a couple more quotes on vaccine conclusions from the conclusion section, tweaks a couple of pars for readability.
Follow the money! Always follow the money! This is the greatest scam ever foisted on the world.
Halton. That woman is everywhere.